Full text of "The doctrine of Holy Scripture and of the Primitive Church, on the subject of religious celibacy : with a vindication of the early church from the mistakes of the author of "Ancient Christianity." : in three parts"

See other formats

Google

This is a digital copy of a book that was preserved for generations on library shelves before it was carefully scanned by Google as part of a project
to make the world’s books discoverable online.

It has survived long enough for the copyright to expire and the book to enter the public domain. A public domain book is one that was never subject
to copyright or whose legal copyright term has expired. Whether a book is in the public domain may vary country to country. Public domain books
are our gateways to the past, representing a wealth of history, culture and knowledge that’s often difficult to discover.

Marks, notations and other marginalia present in the original volume will appear in this file - a reminder of this book’s long journey from the
publisher to a library and finally to you.

Usage guidelines

Google is proud to partner with libraries to digitize public domain materials and make them widely accessible. Public domain books belong to the
public and we are merely their custodians. Nevertheless, this work is expensive, so in order to keep providing this resource, we have taken steps to
prevent abuse by commercial parties, including placing technical restrictions on automated querying.

We also ask that you:

+ Make non-commercial use of the files We designed Google Book Search for use by individuals, and we request that you use these files for
personal, non-commercial purposes.

+ Refrain from automated querying Do not send automated queries of any sort to Google’s system: If you are conducting research on machine
translation, optical character recognition or other areas where access to a large amount of text is helpful, please contact us. We encourage the
use of public domain materials for these purposes and may be able to help.

+ Maintain attribution The Google “watermark” you see on each file is essential for informing people about this project and helping them find
additional materials through Google Book Search. Please do not remove it.

+ Keep it legal Whatever your use, remember that you are responsible for ensuring that what you are doing is legal. Do not assume that just
because we believe a book is in the public domain for users in the United States, that the work is also in the public domain for users in other
countries. Whether a book is still in copyright varies from country to country, and we can’t offer guidance on whether any specific use of
any specific book is allowed. Please do not assume that a book’s appearance in Google Book Search means it can be used in any manner
anywhere in the world. Copyright infringement liability can be quite severe.

About Google Book Search

Google’s mission is to organize the world’s information and to make it universally accessible and useful. Google Book Search helps readers
discover the world’s books while helping authors and publishers reach new audiences. You can search through the full text of this book on the web

atthtto: //books.gqoogle.com/

ouuUse) /5Q

THE

DOCTRINE OF HOLY SCRIPTURE,

AND OF THE

PRIMITIVE CHURCH,

ON THE SUBJECT OF

RELIGIOUS CELIBACY;

WITH A
VINDICATION OF THE EARLY CHURCH FROM THE MISTAKES OF

THE AUTHOR OF .

‘«* ANCIENT CHRISTIANITY.”

IN THREE PARTS.

JAMES BEAVEN, M.A

CURATE OF LEIGH.

[.
LONDON: ee
PRINTED FOR J. G. F. & J. RIVINGTON,

8ST. PAUL’S CHURCH YARD,
AND WATERLOO PLACE, PALL MALL.

1841.

¥o2.

LONDON
GILBERT & RIVINGTON, PRINTERS,

ST. JOHN’S SQUARE.

NOTICE.

Tus portion of the papers on Religious. Celibacy is
sent to the press immediately to save time. The

next will appear at as early a period as possible.

A 2

have been brought up in the principles they at pre-
sent hold; and consequently may entitle me to be
considered as at least equally unprejudiced with the
writer whom I am opposing. It may likewise per-
haps be not amiss to mention, that I am so far
likely to be unprejudiced on this particular subject,
as that I have made trial of both the unmarried and
the married state.

tullian',) apply it to that practice, although opposed
to each other as to its value; 2ndly, That Origen,
who in early life acted on its literal interpretation,
has recorded his recantation of that opinion’; and,
lastly, That the Valesii, who supported that inter-
pretation, were condemned by the Church at large.
It is evident, I think, that the counsel of our
Lord, “ He that can receive it, let him receive it,”
must apply especially to those who choose celibacy
for the kingdom of heaven’s sake; because, in the
two cases previously mentioned, there are obvious
reasons why the parties are so little at liberty, that
it would almost amount to a sin for them to enter
into the state of wedlock. And at all events,. unless
all marriage whatever be undesirable, their condition
can scarcely be spoken of as a gift of heaven. Or
even if, with Origen, we take a figurative meaning
throughout *, and consider the first class as those

kavova per’ evoeBeiac, evyapiorovrra pév emt rq doOEion yaprrt, od
puoovvra O& rv Krioty, ovde ELovBevovvra Toug yeyapnkérac.

1 De virginibus velandis, 10. Viri tot virgines, tot spadones
voluntarii.

De cultu feminarum, II. 9. Non enim et multi ita faciunt et
se spadonatui obsignant, propter regnum Dei tam fortem et
utique permissam voluptatem sponte ponentes.

7 In Matt. tom. xv. 4. ’AvadaBwv... riv... payapary
rov IIvevparoc,.... pr arropuevocg rov cwuaroc. And again, cai
oby we olovrac of cwpuartkic Ta Kara Toy Tomoy élettngorec.

* Origen’s words in the passage I have twice mentioned are
these. E’vov>~yor rpomexic viv ot dpyol rpdc appodioa déyouvr’

“A \ 4 2? , € ~ - . ~ ’ :
ay, Kal po) émdtddyreg Eavrovg Taig Kara ravra doedyelace kal

who are naturally indisposed to sensual pleasure, but
not incapable of it; and the second, as those who
have been persuaded by mere human reasoning, such
as might weigh with a heathen or an infidel, or
by heretical notions, to renounce it ; we cannot, from
the simple force of the terms, speak of this second
state as a gift of God. It remains, therefore, that
the case contemplated by our Lord as such, is that
in which persons find in themselves, or have acquired
by mortification and prayer, a comparative indiffer-
ence to celibacy, at the same time that they feel a
strong desire to devote their undivided thoughts and
powers to the service of religion. And in such a case

axaBapciatc, 7} ra waparAjota abroic. Eliot o€ rHv wpd¢g ravra
> id ~ e ‘ cy > ~ 9
dpyovvrwy Sradopal oluar rpeic. Oi pev yap éx Karaokevije eioe
~ a ef
rowvrot, wept wy déyotr av Td ciol......otrwe. Oi O& ék
Adywy pév aoKover TpoTparévrec THY TOY Appodiaiwy droyHy, Kai
waone Tic wept rov réwory akoAaciac. Od py TO yevvijoay abroic
? , \ of \ ‘ eg ef 9 lA
THY ToLauTny wpdBEeoty Kai GoKnoty, Kal THY, ty OUTWC OvOpdow,
KardpQwowv Adyoo yéeyove Oeov, &d\d\A avOpwmevoe Oyo, Etre TOY
pirooogncdyrwy map’ “EdAnow, etre THY KwrvdvTwWY yapeir,
améxecOar Bowparwy, év raic aipéceotv. Odror Of peor doxovar
~ ~ ‘\ i ~ we
dndovoba év rp’ ciciv...... avOpwrwy. To & aroxiic aitor,
ei rov Adyor rig avadaBwy rov Lorvra kai Evepyh Kal rouwrepoy
e ‘ ~ 4 OL 2 ‘ @ > @¢ e 9 ,
uxép wacav payapay dicropoy, Kal rv, wo dvdpacer 6 ’Awd-
-~ ® N ~ ~

orodos, payarpay rou Ivevparog, exrépvoe To Tig Wuyiic waOnreKoy,
py axropevoc Tov owparoc’ Kai rovro owt Kat vohoac Baowdeiay
obpaviv, kai péytoroy ovpaddAdpevov mpdc To KANpovopioat
Baoreiay obpavéy ro éxrepeiy Adyy TO wabnrexov ric Wuyne
avrov. Toic d& rowovroe appdfor ay, kai ovy we otovrar oi
owparkic Ta Kara rov rdérov ebetdndurec, TO’ eloiy ..... :
oupayer.

c 2

has been the general moral condition of those whom
it must include?” In raising this difficulty, however,
he forgets that they are by the hypothesis “ blame-
less,” and therefore can only be those unmarried
Christians who have kept themselves pure.

CHAPTER IIL.

THESE appear to be all the passages which bear
directly upon the subject; and from the principles
contained in them, there are some conclusions which
flow so naturally and evidently, that they may be
said to be necessary corollaries.

First, then, it must surely be evident that the spirit
which too much prevails in our own times, which con-
siders all persons, or at least all women, as necessarily
desirous of marrying, and yet despises them for being
so; and regards those, who remain long unmarried, in
the light of disappointed adventurers, and as proper
subjects of banter and jest, is an improper spirit. Few
of us but must have known persons in this condition,
whom all would regard as amongst the excellent of
the earth; whose lives have been spent in doing
good; who have given examples of patience, and
meekness, and humility, and self-denial, and in short
self-sacrifice, which most of us would be glad to hope
that we could imitate. And we must be perfectly

“Lectures on the Scripture Proof of the Doctrines
of the Church,” which, if read by undisciplined
minds, appear to me calculated to produce infidelity
or popery. But no fear of misrepresentation will, I
trust, deter me from the pursuit of truth, nor from
its defence when put forth by others, if circum-
stances appear to call upon me to defend it: and I
freely confess that I shall esteem myself only too
happy if my lot may be with such persons as they in
the great day of general doom. Humility, devotion,
and charity, and even “ submissiveness,” must be
better preparatives for the last account, than self-
sufficiency, presumption, hasty imputation, and the
spirit of the scorner.

YHE END OF PART LI.

GILBERT & RIVINGTON, Printers, St. John’s Square, London.

THE

DOCTRINE OF HOLY SCRIPTURE,

AND OF THE

PRIMITIVE CHURCH,

ON THE SUBJECT OF

RELIGIOUS CELIBACY;

WITH A
VINDICATION OF THE EARLY CHURCH FROM THE MISTAKES OF
THE AUTHOR OF

“ ANCIENT CHRISTIANITY.”

PART II.

JAMES BEAVEN, M.A.

CURATE OF LEIGH.

LONDON:
PRINTED FOR J. G. F. & J. RIVINGTON,

ST. PAUL’S CHURCH YARD,
AND WATERLOO PLACE, PALL MALL.

1840.

LONDON:
GILBERT & RIVINGTON, PRINTERS,
ST. JOHN'S SQUARF.

NOTICE.

The third, and, it is hoped, concluding Part, will

appear in due time.

PART II.

CHAPTER I.

THE two main objections to the early Fathers seem
to be, that they have erred in doctrine, and that the
moral condition of the early Church was not such
as to entitle it to much deference; and these two
objections appear to have been blended into one in
Mr. Taylor’s recent attack upon their principles and
practices as connected with religious celibacy. In
reference to this subject he has contended that false
principles and great moral abuses prevailed in the
Church from the very earliest times subsequent to
the very age of the apostles; that they extended to
every part of the Church, and that they have con-
tinued down to our own times. Now it is well
known that the supporters of Church principles have
always contended, that if we can discover any doc-
trine or practice which was received by the Church
in the age succeeding the apostles, which then uni-
E

versally prevailed, and which has been continued in
the Church more or less extensively ever since, that
this by itself is an argument, and one of the very
strongest kind, that such doctrine or practice is
of divine origin; and consequently, that whosoever
impugns such a doctrine, or would do away with
such a practice, must bring authority of the most
infallible kind in opposition to it. In short, we con-
tend that, with regard to such doctrine or practice,
it is, in fact, impossible to produce divine authority
in contravention of it.

But the opponents of Church principles turn round
upon us and say, Your notion is very good in theory,
but in practice it entirely fails. We can produce
both doctrine and practice answering to all these
requirements, which you yourselves, if you are truly
Protestants, must acknowledge to have been erroneous
in the highest degree; namely, the primitive doctrine
and practice of religious celibacy: and therefore the
boasted test, of “semper, ubique, et ab omnibus,” falls
to the ground.

They say, moreover, You have been in the habit
of attaching great weight to the authority of the
early Church, and of quoting its writers as testi-
monies to the doctrine and polity which the apostles
left behind them: but if the primitive Church itself
was in material error from the very beginning on
this subject, what security have we that in any point
it is to be relied upon? If it departed so egregiously
from truth upon this point, what security have we

and even if it were otherwise, the Scripture is not
therefore to be reckoned doubtful, because prejudiced
persons refuse to acknowledge its plain meaning. If
we grant this, we shall open the way to universal
scepticism.

The conclusions, then, which I drew from the Word
of God were, that He has given to some the gift
of continency for the extension and support of his
kingdom: that marriage is a state in which it is
_abstractedly more difficult to serve God without dis-
traction than a state of celibacy: that to the mass of
persons marriage notwithstanding is, from the con-
stitution of their nature, most desirable: that by
those to whom God has vouchsafed the gift of con-
tinency, celibacy is most properly chosen as being in
itself a state in which they who are thus gifted can
best promote the honour of God and the extension
of his kingdom: and that celibacy is therefore not
to be disparaged or discouraged, but rather to be
acknowledged as a state of privilege, and in some
respects higher than that of matrimony. These
conclusions are all either distinctly laid down in
Scripture, or directly implied in what is distinctly
expressed.

It appears to me in vain to say that these views
may lead to an over-exaltation of celibacy, and to a
direct disparagement of matrimony. I am quite
prepared to grant that they may; nay, more, I am
prepared expressly to show that they have done so:
but that does not prove them to be wrong. It only

proves that they ure capable of being pushed to
extremes: and what truth is not thus capable ?

With these views, then, I purpose to address
myself to the writings of the primitive Church; and
I shall endeavour to show, in opposition to Mr. Tay-
lor’s statements, that the sub-apostolical age was
scriptural on this subject: that corruption of doctrine
on the subject came in gradually, and from sources
either extrinsical to the Church, or not necessarily
connected with celibacy: that no great corruption of
practice followed in the sub-apostolical age, and no
general corruption for many ages after: and if life
and opportunity are granted me, I trust to point out
those lessons on the subject which we may fitly draw
from the whole history.

The first notice we have of the subject is in the
epistle of St. Ignatius to Polycarp' and his Church ;
and in this epistle St. Ignatius has this advice to
those who remained in celibacy. “If any is able to
remain in chastity in honour of the Lord of the flesh’,
let him so remain without boasting. If he boasts,
he is lost; and should he be more highly thought of?

1 § 5.

2 The Latin version has “ in honour of the Lord’s flesh ;” but
it is putting a force upon the original so to render it. It is ei¢
tiny rov Kuplov rij¢ oapxoc: and there is no various reading of
any authority.

* This appears to be the most natural rendering of éay yrwoby
mréoy ; but the Latin version seems to have led all the interpreters

to other senses. This version gives st vidert velit. Smith para-
phrases it thus: St se magis e@quo speclandum cognoscendumque

than the bishop, he is corrupted.” Here we find no
unscriptural principle even hinted at. To choose
celibacy with a view to the honour of him who is
Lord of the flesh equally with the spirit, seems to be
only another way of looking at the scriptural idea of
doing it for the kingdom of God’s sake. But we
have no doubt a hint at a practical abuse, namely,
that some who had the gift were disposed to boast of
it, and that some had begun to attach undue value
to the gift when seen in others. This, I say, appears
to be hinted at, although not expressly stated. But
what does it amount to? Is this “one of the worst
abuses” of religious celibacy ? Would to God it was.
Is it even peculiar to celibacy? Is it not what all
God’s gifts are liable to? Do we not find in the
epistles of St. Paul himself that the gift of tongues
gave occasion to vainglory in the possessors, and to
their being unduly exalted by those who heard them ?
Nay, more, to all parties actually setting themselves
up against, not merely their bishop, but one of the
very inspired apostles? Do we see any thing un-
natural in this, however lamentable? Do we hear
St. Paul discourage the exercise of the gift? nay,
rather, does he not actually say, “Desire spiritual
gifts.” Is it made by any one to cast a slur upon the

velit, ut in alhorum opinione episcopo preferatur: Archbishop
Wake, If he should desire to be more taken notice of: and Mr.
Jacobson, the recent editor of the Apostolical Fathers, If he
should glory over. Ido not deny that it might have this sense,
but I have sought in vain for any authority for it.

gift of tongues? Nothing of the kind. And why
then should we not look in the same manner upon
the case of religious celibacy? St. Paul cautioned the
Corinthians against the abuse of the gifts, and the
attaching undue importance to them; and Ignatius
felt himself similarly called upon in regard to the
gift of celibacy.

Exception has likewise been taken against this
passage, as though Ignatius had spoken slightingly
of matrimony in calling chaste celibacy by the name
of chastity (ayvua): but until it can be shown that
this was a term specially invented by him or by the
advocates of religious celibacy, it cannot be argued
with any fairness that he or they intended thereby to
disparage marriage. Nor, indeed, even: then: for
what other term could have been used with equal
propriety? ‘A-yapia, or any equivalent term, would
not express that such persons were not only unmar-
ried, but also chaste: and when the main idea to be
expressed was that of the absolute chastity of the
individuals, it is no wonder that the governing idea
was taken to include all. It is true that ayapoc is
the term employed by: Athenagoras!; but then he
adds, éAwidt rov parAov cvvicecOa tr Oew, which fixes
the meaning. Justin Martyr? uses a¢@opoc, a term
corresponding to ayveia. Justin, indeed, has also
been blamed for applying this term to celibacy, as
though he intended to imply that marriage was a

* Leg. 28. ? Apnol. ii. 15.

pollution. But Clement of Alexandria, who con-
tends at great length’ for the purity and holiness of
marriage, uses apQopoc in the same sense as Justin,
applying it to the son of Nicolas the deacon, who, as
well as his sisters, never married’. And, indeed,
Ignatius himself elsewhere applies the same term
ayveia to the purity of married persons, thereby show-
ing beyond a doubt that he had no idea of disparaging
marriage.

Besides the opinion of Ignatius himself, it would
perhaps appear at first sight, from a passage in his
epistles®, that vzrgzns had in his time displaced widows
as servants or dependents of the Church; for he
salutes the virgins called widows, without mentioning
widows at all in any other way. Whether this may
have been a peculiarity of Smyrna, that virgins acted
as deaconesses, we have no direct information: but
as we know from the Canons of various councils,
that widows, as distinct from virgins, were an order
of the Church for centuries afterwards, it is most
probable that the substitution which had taken place
at Smyrna was peculiar and local. Indeed Ter-
tullian, long after, speaks* of it as an astonishing
and even monstrous thing, that a virgin should be
reckoned amongst the widows. His words are,
“ Plane scio alicubi virginem in viduatu ab annis non-

' Strom. III. vi. § 45-56.
2 Strom. IIT. vi. § 46. Tér éxeivov rékywy Ondsiag peév xara-
ynpaca wapBEvouc, 4POopoy dé dtapetvac roy vidv.

* Ad Smyrn, 13. * De Virg. Veland. 9.

days, but of whom scarcely any remains have come
down to us: I mean Dionysius of Corinth. In the
time of Eusebius there were extant no less than
seven epistles of his to different churches, in two of
which he touches upon this subject. It seems that
Pinytus, bishop of Gnossus in Crete, had pressed the
subject of celibacy upon his people; and this calls for
the fraternal advice of Dionysius, who, amongst other
things, exhorts him “not to lay upon them so heavy
a burden, as to make celibacy a duty, but to consider
the infirmity of the generality of persons'.” And it
is added, that Pinytus expressed great esteem for
Dionysius and assent to what he had said: but at
the same time it would seem that he took umbrage
at him for his interference; for although he very
courteously requested him to write again, he desires
that it may be upon deeper subjects, and suggests
to him, whether, by treating Christians always like
babes, he does not risk their growing old before they
have left off leading strings. Dionysius has another
epistle, in which, like St. Paul, he treats, amongst other
things, upon marriage and celibacy. But what is
there surprising in all this? After St. Paul’s recorded
wishes on the subject, is it wonderful that we find a
single bishop, of more zeal than judgment, endeavour-
ing, as he might think, to carry out the Apostle’s
ideas more fully? Natural, however, as this was,

1 Euseb. /Zist, IV. xxiii. 4. My Bapv gopriov érdvayxec ro
wept ayvelacg roig adeApoic éxtTDévat, Tig Ce THY TOANWY KaTa-

aroxaleoBat dobeveiac.

take in Irenzeus, we advance nearly twenty years
further, and hear no more on the subject; for he
never so much as alludes to it. So far is it from
being true that unscriptural doctrine and corrupt
practices were connected with religious celibacy from
the beginning.

And it is well worthy of being remarked, that this
age is the one of most importance to us as members
of the Church of England; for in it we have our own
distinctive principles developed beyond a doubt, and
none which are opposed to us. We have infant bap-
tism, we have regeneration in baptism, we have the
three orders of clergy, we have the supremacy of
bishops, we have the apostolical succession, we have
scripture as a standard and tradition as accessary ;
and we have not papal supremacy, nor transubstan-
tiation, nor, in short, any of the points in dispute
between ourselves and the Romanist on the one
hand, or the Dissenter on the other. Up to this
point we have the succession of men who had con-
versed with the disciples of the apostles; and, up to
this time, for any thing that can be shown to the
contrary, apostolical doctrine and discipline prevailed
generally in the Church, and in all its high places.

CHAPTER II.

But we now come to the times of Clement of Alex-
andria and Tertullian ; and in their writings we shall
see reason to think, that, although the Church at
large had not countenanced any thing erroneous upon
this subject, yet that in some quarters ahaa craves
ideas were beginning to creep in.

These two fathers were, as I have said, contem-
poraries, and appear to have died about the year
220, after having filled the public eye for about
twenty years, the former at Alexandria, the latter
at Carthage, and perhaps subsequently in Asia
Minor. [I shall cite the former first, for the simple
reason, that he was never accused of heterodoxy,—
and that he must have enjoyed a full share of the
confidence of the Church, from the circumstance of
his filling without blame the responsible station of
Master of the Christian School at Alexandria, in
which catechumens were trained for baptism. Even
the office of a Bishop was scarcely more important
than this; and, although, no doubt, a person might

be appointed to fill it, who afterwards proved un-
sound, (and, therefore, the mere appointment is no
proof of orthodoxy,) yet, for a man to hold it en-
tirely without blame, he must have accorded with
the bishops and clergy of the Egyptian Church, and
in them with the Church Catholic. Now, it is very
true that in his time we can discover that there
were corrupt notions on the subject of celibacy pre-
vailing: for some!’ professed to abstain from mar-
riage on the ground of its being a pollution, and
declared that they were true followers of Jesus, who
never married. But there is not the slightest proof
that he was aware of such opinions being held by
sound members of the Church. When he has to
contend with them he connects them distinctly with
the Gnostics; who, however they might in many
instances escape excommunication by concealing or
disguising their real sentiments, were regularly ex-
cluded when they showed themselves in their true
colours. Now the Gnostics were of two kinds, the
profligate and the ascetic: they both agreed in
teaching that the flesh was the work of a being
inferior to the Supreme Being; but the former
taught that all actions were indifferent and could not
affect the soul, or that every one must for his own
sake try every kind of action; the latter, that all
works of the flesh were as much as possible to be
abstained from, by way of showing abhorrence of

2 Strom. IIT. vi. § 49.

him who made the flesh. And it was against this
latter class that Clement had to contend. It may
perhaps be imagined that none but Christians would
have reverenced Jesus sufficiently to imitate Him:
but Ireneus' informs us that some of the Gnostics
declared him to be of their party, and Clement’
records that Valentinus fancied that his body had
qualities different from those of ordinary men. Mr.
Taylor indeed, as we have already seen, contends that
the fanaticism Clement was opposing was general in
the Church: but he brings no proof of his assertion.

We will now see what were Clement’s own views,
which, from his position, may be reasonably taken
to be the views of the Church; and we shall find
them to be strictly in accordance with what we have
already elicited from the Sacred Writings. He
speaks of the power of celibacy as a divine gift,
regards those as happy who possess it*, (in strict
accordance with St. Paul’s own feeling), and the gift
itself as one for which the recipient should give
thanks *; which, however, is not to be regarded as

1 1. iii, 1. xxiv. 2. ? Strom. III. vii. § 5.

* Strom. III. i. § 4. ‘Hyeic ebvovyiay per Kal oi¢ rovro dedw-
pnrat xd Ocov paxapiZoper, povoyaplav o€ cal ryv wept rov Eva
yapor oepvdérnra Oavpaloper, cupracyxey o& deiv éyorrec Kal
adAjdwy ra Bapn Baordley, ph word tig OoKwv Kadwe EoTdvat Kal
avroc wéon® Tepi dé Tov Cevrépov yapou, Ei TupOl, pnaly O axdaTONoG,
yapnoor.

* Strom. ITI. xviii. § 105. "Efov edéoOac rv ebvovyiay Kara roy
vyti Kavova per’ evocfseiac, evyaptorourra pev Eni TH doBeion yapire;

9 ao \ 9 \ 9 ~ ‘\ 7)
ob puoovrra O€ Thy Krloty, ovde ELovOEvovyra ToUg yeyapnKdrag, KTI-

virtuous unless it be taken up from love towards
God', and, therefore, is to be adopted with self-
distrust, and reverence, and gratitude, and main-
tained without vainglory towards those who marry.
Every one must recognise the sobriety of judgment
evinced in these views, and their strict accordance
with Scripture : and his estimation of religious celi-
bacy is the more worthy of notice from the copious-
ness and energy with which he contends elsewhere
for the purity of marriage’. And if he does hint
that some took up celibacy from secondary or even
from unworthy motives, this is not a taint peculiarly
attending that state; for it is what happens every
day in regard to any point whatever in which one
man appears better or stricter than another.

But Clement is not the only writer of this. gene-
ration. There was another of a very different
stamp in another part of the Church, whose writ-
ings have come down to us, “the fiery Tertullian,”
a presbyter of the Church of Carthage: but before
I quote a single sentence from his writings, it will
be necessary to consider a little what importance
ought rightfully to attach to them. Tertullian then
cannot be quoted with confidence as a Church
writer; for this sufficient reason, that for some years

“ Y e , LY ° , ow \ ° /
aroc ‘yap 6 Kéopog, KrioTn C& } Evvovyia’ dudw Cé evyaptoroUYTwY
9 4 > ?7 9 , . 949 ‘if > 2
Ev olg EraxOnoay, et yevwoxovor kat &¢' ol¢ EraxOnoar.

* Strom. III. vi. § 51. Ode } ebvovyia évdperory, et py oe
9 , , N ‘ f
ayarny yivotro thy mpoc roy Oso.
2 Strom. III. xii.—xiv.

nay, that even married persons abstained from ma-
trimonial] intercourse, from taking the passage, 1 Cor.
vii. 29. in a literal sense'. This latter element
is clearly contrary to the advice of St. Paul, in
another unequivocal passage?. But as Tertullian
represents them as so doing from a feeling of the
degradation of sexual intercourse, a feeling which
we do not as yet find supported by any authority in
the Church, we are warranted in supposing that
these might be persons of the same fanatical ten-
dencies as Tertullian himself; who, in another of his
treatises, expressly speaks of matrimony as akin
to fornication, and distinctly dissuades from mar-

* De Cultu Feminarum, ii. 9. Si ergo uxores quoque ipsas sic
habendas demonstrat tanquam non habeantur, propter angustias
temporum, quid sentiat de vanis instrumentis earum? (i.e. their
ornaments.) Non enim et multi ita faciunt, et se spadonatui
obsignant, propter regnum Dei tam fortem et utique permissam
voluptatem sponte ponentes ?

Ad Uxorem, i. 5,6. Quot enim sunt qui statim a lavacro
carnem suam obsignant? Quot item qui consensu pari inter se
matrimonii debitum tollunt, voluntarii spadones pro cupiditate
regni ccelestis ?

De Virgin. Veland. 10. Ceeterum satis inhumanum, si femine
quidem, per omnia viris subditee, honorigeram notam virginitatis
suze preeferant, quasi suspiciantur et circumspiciantur et magni-
ficentur a fratribus, virt autem tot virgines, tot spadones volun-
tarii, czeco bono suo incedant, nihil gestantes, quod et ipsos
faceret illustres. 7

21 Cor. vii. 24, 27.

CHAPTER III.

But if the body of the Church cannot be justly
charged with any material taint, there was a corner,
and in that age not an unimportant one, in which
the ill-omened sentiments of Tertullian were pro-
ducing their proper fruit,—as the evils which he
foretold were coming forth into undesirable noto-
riety. I allude to the Church of Carthage, of which
in that age Cyprian was the chief and most illus-
trious prelate. He was contemporary with Origen,
for they both went to their rest about the same time;
but it is probable that he was somewhat the younger
of the two; nor does it appear that they had ever
any communication with each other. Indeed Cyprian
was the disciple of Tertullian, and not only that, but
his warm admirer; and when we add to this that he
was not, like Origen, bred a Christian, but converted
at mature age, and that his previous profession of a
rhetorician had:accustomed him to overcolour every
thing, we must not be surprised if we find his feel-
ings in some degree stern and harsh, his ideas
| G 2

their footing, except by withdrawing as far as pos-
sible from the confines of immorality. Even such
a man as Dr. Johnson was accustomed to say that
he could abstain from wine altogether, but that he
could not enjoy it in moderation: and no doubt
Cyprian, and such as he, especially if converted in
mature age, had much of the same feeling, both for
themselves and for others.

The second point he takes up is the attendance of
the virgins at nuptial festivities. A priort we might
argue that a man’s mind must be in a very unhealthy
state to see any thing indecorous in such attendance.
But we have only to read his arguments to see
that festivities, such as he depicts', were such as
no Christian ought to have countenanced, to say
nothing of modest young women. One expression
there is in which, after reading Tertullian, one may
for a moment suppose that he calls matrimonial
intercourse by the name of stuprum; but upon re-
flection, it is evident that he does not speak of that
intercourse generally, but only when stimulated by
excess and lascivious language.

- The third abuse he notices is that of the professed

* Quasdam non pudet nubentibus interesse, et in illa lascivi-
entium libertate sermonum colloquia incesta miscere, audire quod
non decet, quod non licet dicere, observare; et esse preesentes
inter verba turpia et temulenta convivia, quibus libidinum fomes
accenditur, sponsa ad patientiam stupri, ad audaciam sponsus

animatur.

CHAPTER IV.

WE have now to pass over a space of nearly forty
years, in which we have no indications of the progress
of opinion. In the beginning of the next century
died Methodius, a bishop of the Eastern Church, who
has left behind him an express Treatise on Religious
Celibacy. How far we have his own opinions in it
may be doubtful ; for it is in the form of a set of dis-
courses by a company of professed virgins, in which
different shades of opinion are expressed by the dif-
ferent speakers: but perhaps it is on that account
more valuable, as expressing in all probability the
views of the higher class of minds in the Eastern
Church on the subject. I say the higher class of
minds, for it contains a refined and_ philosophical
train of thought, which could not be appreciated and
would not be read by persons of ordinary capacity
and attainments.

There is a perfect harmony between all the
speakers upon one subject, and that is the great

106

advantage of celibacy, as a means of detaching us
from earth, and training ourselves up for heaven.
The lady in whose garden the entertainment is
given, at which these discourses are supposed to
be delivered, addresses them as “the boast of her
exultation,” and congratulates them upon “cultivating
the pure meadows of Christ with unmarried hands '.”
The first speaker declares that “ virginity is a great
thing, wonderful and glorious beyond nature; and,
if we must speak openly, following the Holy Scrip-
tures, the source and flower and firstfruits of immor-
tality, and by itself the most excellent and most
honourable endowment ’”;” and that, “if we intend
to resemble God and Christ, we shall be zealous in
adorning virginity ’.” But if we come to inquire
further whether it is celibacy in the abstract that
she so admires, we shall find her saying that “it is
not sufficient that the body should be kept pure, (as
it is not seemly that the temple should be more
handsome than the image of the divinity that inhabits
it,) but that the soul, which inhabits the body, as the
image does the temple, should be kept in order, and

' ARETE. 7 veavidec, émijg abyhpara peyadogpooirnc, @
kaddurapbévot, rove dknpdrove Xptorov yewpywoat Aetuwvac dyup-
pevrore xeEpal.

2 MARCELLA. Meyadn ric éarer, vreppuwe kai Gavpaory Kal
Evdokoc 7 TlapGevia’ cai et xpy pavepwe eireiv ETomMEMNY Talc dylatc
Ypapaic, ro ovOap rijc dpOagaiag Kal rd dvOoc Kal i) drapyy abrifc,
70 Gptaroy kal kaANoToy Emirnoevpa povoy ruyydrvet.

> Kai fpeic tipa, ei péAdoepev Kab? duoiwoww ~ceobar Oeod cal

Xprorov, piroripwpeba rv rapeviay riagy.

109

expressly recommends those persons to marry, who
after professing religious celibacy, find that they can-
not keep their resolution, or have not the wish to
keep it’.

It is not my intention to follow all the speakers.
It is sufficient to say, that they support the grand
idea of the perfection of the virgin state by various
allegories; and at length the lady who gives the
entertainment, winds up the subject by sundry
cautions and advices, showing that although they thus
extolled celibacy as a means of perfection, yet that
the strictest celibacy was not by itself available:
that pride and vainglory, and despising of others, and
love of money and selfishness, if cherished, tarnished
all its beauty and rendered it unavailing’.

1 TuHatia.—Tove cara mpdpacw xevocotiac rwv dxparecrepwy
éxi rovro mapednAvOdrac droddXerat, cupBovrAEdwy yapety.

TIpoxplywy rov ydpor rig doynpooivng, emi rwv Ehopévwy pey
wapbevevery, SvcavacyeTourrwy C& TO péTa Tadra Kal UroKaporyTwY'
cal \éyw pe, Oe aidw rv rpdc dvOpwmovc, ubyovrvrwy émtpeverr,
Epyy o€ obde pakpdrepoy évdcarpipar Ouvapevwr rp ebvovyiopg.

? ARETE.—Ob yap oxéray ry Eavrov odpka ric Kara ovvovaiay
dyevoror Hoovijc pudoripetrac rnpetv avOpwmoc, rev GddAwy pr) Kpd-
TWY, dyvelay Tig.

Ovdd ye drav, mpdc rac ELwOev ExOvpiac dtarovy Kaprepwy, iTep-
aipnrat d& gvovovpevoc, abr@ 61) robry Ty dbvacBat Twy Tij¢ capKoc
Umexcauparwy Kpareiv, Kat mavrag we obdery éovderwy, Hyetrat
ayvelay Tiay.

Oveé ye érdre Evapvverui Tic xphuact, ripgv abriy anovedlet.

Ovd€ ye 6 Equrov breppuwe tyyoupevog PiAciv, kal ro Eaury pdvy
auugépoy omovddlwy oxoreiv, appovrig d€ rwy wAnalov, ayvelay

rug.

120

of them, professed celibacy; that in some parts of the
Church this vow was enforced by penance or degra-
dation ; that the improprieties and scandals which
Tertullian had foreseen from anything which should
operate to enforce celibacy, did in some, perhaps
many, instances appear; and that matters appeared
tending to the universal probihition of marriage to
the clergy, and the universal enforcement of the vow,
by whomsoever taken. And if Mr. Taylor had
confined himself to such a statement, no contradic-
tion would have been necessary. Every age of the
Church has its actual evils and its evil tendencies:
but, thank God, the monstrous charge that, upon any
point, corruption of doctrine, and consequent corrup-
tion of morals, prevailed throughout the primitive
Church, down to the Nicene era, cannot be sub-
stantiated.

THE END OF PART II.

123

may see in the sentiments of a layman much more
exactly the prevalent feeling than in those of a cler-
gyman. He is giving an account of Christianity for
the use of the heathen; and, discoursing on its
power of redeeming men from the dominion of lust,
shows its effects upon married life; and from thence
he proceeds to show that it should reach not only
the actions, but also the thoughts. Foreseeing, how-
ever, that his heathen readers would be apt to think
his doctrine impracticable, he proceeds to say’,
“nor let any one think it difficult to curb pleasure,
and to confine it, naturally disposed as it is to roam,
within the bounds of chastity and modesty: for the
idea of even conquering it is held forth to mankind,
and numbers have retained the blessed and unbro-
ken virginity of the body; and there are many who
enjoy with the greatest pleasure that heavenly me-

1 Divin. Institut. vi. 23. Nec vero aliquis existimet difficile
esse freenos imponere voluptati, eamque vagam et errantem casti-
tatis pudicitizeque limitibus includere: cum propositum sit homi-
nibus eam vincere ; ac plurimi beatam atque incorruptam corpo-
ris integritatem retinuerint, multique sint qui hoc ccelesti genere
vite felicissime -perfruantur. Quod quidem Deus non ita fieri
pracepit tanquam astringat, (quia generari homines oportet,) sed
tanquam sinat ; scit enim quantam his affectibus imposuerit neces-
sitatem, Si quis hoc, inquit, facere potuerit, habebit eximiam
incomparabilemque mercedem, Quod continentiz# genus quasi
fastigium est omniumque consummatio virtutum. Ad quam
siquis eniti atque eluctari potuerit, hunc servum Dominus, hunc
discipnlum Magister agnoscit: hic terram triumphabit: hie erit
consimilis Deo, qui virtutem Dei cepit,

125

celibacy was honoured in all, and matrimony dis-
couraged in the clergy in his time; for he shows that
it was not from any idea of the comparative impurity
of the matrimonial connexion, but because it was
supposed that the peculiar business of the clergy,
viz. the saving of men’s souls, was a more. important
business than building up a family. In fact no sen-
sual idea appears to have entered into his thoughts
in speaking on the subject. He simply took the
facts as they were, and discusses the question, what
was the reason of the apparent opposition between
the Old Testament and the New upon that subject ?
Why were the ancients more intent upon _per-
petuating the race than Christians’ ?

For this he gives three reasons: 1. That there is
not the same motive for multiplying the species as
formerly, every corner of the world being full: 2.
That men have a greater pressure of business and a
less facility of procuring sustenance than formerly, and
are consequently, if parents, more liable to be drawn
away from the care of the soul; and upon that head
he quotes St. Paul in those passages which I have
myself cited: 3. That there is a more pressing need
of persons disengaged from worldly cares to spread
the knowledge of God, since Christ has opened his
kingdom to the whole world. His language so en-
tirely confirms what I have formerly said upon the

' Demonsir. Evang. i. 9. Ti dijra ot pév wept yapove cai wat-
dorotiag wheioroy siaiyor oroveny, ipiv o& ravro mapapepigerae ra
pépor 5

127

rest of their life.” In the same spirit he says' that
“it is fitting that those who are busied about the
service of God should abstain for the future from
matrimonial intercourse ;’ but that for others “the
word almost advises marriage.” So far again is
Eusebius from forbidding to marry, or from pene
virginity unduly. —

In his time Christian caaibe and. ascahiaa Sons
to attract attention, whether living solitary or in a
kind of societies; but although we first hear of them
now, it is evident that the habit was no new thing,
It was not peculiar to any religion; but equally
practised by the worshippers of the true God and
by idolaters. Elijah was evidently in the habit of
retiring into solitude; and the same may be said of
John the Baptist. The schools of the prophets were
a species of religious communities. And so through-
out the East, from time immemorial, false religions
have had their solitaries and their monastic com-
munities. Philo testifies to the prevalence of reli-
gious communities in his time, worshippers of the

1 Tootroy émrnpnvapevot, bre kal Karat rove rijc Kawi beabyj-
kno vépove ob mdpray drnyopeverae rd rij¢ watdowotiac, dAAG Kav
Towr@ Ta mapamAHow roig mada Ocopidéotv dvaréraxrar. Xpyvac
yap gnaw 6 Adyoe rov éxlaxoroy yeyovévat judg yuvarkdc ayvdpa,
TDojy adda roig tepwpévorg kal wepi rv rod Ocod Oeparelay aoyo-
Roupévorg dvéxew ouwdy odac abrove TpoorKet rij yapenie ope-
NMag* Geo. dé pi) ric rocatrne Htiwvrae ispovpyiac, rovrou 6 Ad-yoe
Kabupinow povovovyi dtapindijy aracw xnpurrwy, dre dy rhpwoc
Ke Ts Aw

129°

we must remember that religious seclusion did not
arise from Christian celibacy, but was the produce of
natural religion in a certain class of minds, grafted
upon the faith and profession of the Gospel. The
ascetics and coenobites already existing in Egypt
before the Gospel was brought there, would find
something in the Gospel which suited themselves.
The Christians who met together daily for devotional
exercises in Jerusalem, who gave up all their goods
and had all things in common, would carry the same
feelings with them when they were scattered abroad
every where preaching the word. And the devout
worshipper of one God in Egypt, would have a
mind prepared for the reception of the Gospel, and
would not find that he must necessarily change his
characteristic habits when he received it. If he was
in habitual celibacy, it was rather an accident of the
system, than the end of it. He wished to withdraw
his heart from the world, and therefore he would not
involve himself in worldly cares. It was not from
any aversion to marriage itself, but to its worldly
entanglements. Shall we say that he would have
done much better to mingle in the world, and set a
good example, and exert himself for the benefit of
his fellow creatures? No doubt that, 7 well per-
Jormed, would have been a more honourable part;
but it was far from being an easy one. He felt it
much easier to retire, and endeavour to save his own
soul, by training it to the habits which he thought
likely to prevail in heaven ; to reading and devotion,

131

much indebted even now to the prayers of the shy
and secluded, few as they are, as to the activity of
the bustling and vigorous? Is not each useful in
his vocation ? |

To illustrate what I have said I will tell a story I
once read in Ephrem Syrus. It is indeed from me-
mory, but the main features of it are correct. Father
Abram was a hermit, who had given a handsome
ortune into the hands of trustees, and had retired
from the city of Alexandria into a lonely place in its
vicinity, and by his devotional and quiet habits, by
his meekness and unfailing charity, had gained the
veneration and love of all that knew him. There
was likewise a heathen town in its neighbourhood,
which had resisted the efforts of missionary upon
missionary : every one returned baffled and dispirited.
At length the bishop and some of the clergy be-
thought them of Abram, and hoped that his deep
piety and venerable character might prevail where
no one else had succeeded. He combated their
' persuasions for some time; but at length he suffered
himself to be ordained, and undertook the mission.
But he did not undertake it in the ordinary way.
He did not go and preach to them: he went and
built them a church, though he knew well that there
was not a Christian in the place. He went to his
trustees, requested from them the relics of his for-
tune, collected materials and workmen, and super-
intended the erection of a beautiful little temple.
When it was erected he did not go through the

133

to think. He may not have been a Christian such as
we see in a highly civilized and refined community:
he may have mistaken the right application of Chris-
tian precepts in his own time even; but he did posi-
tive good in the world; he acted beneficially upon
the minds of his contemporaries. It was for this
reason no doubt that Athanasius, with the whole of
his contemporaries, revered the solitaries, and ac-
knowledged their services, although he did not him-
self choose that way of life. But there was a cir-
cumstance in the times in which Athanasius lived
which would have attached him to them warmly,
even if he had entertained no previous prejudices in
their favour. We are to remember that Athanasius
was in his own day the great champion of the
Divinity of Christ; that he acted, and wrote, and
suffered and triumphed for this great doctrine: that
every event, and every institution and every indivi-
dual took its hue and colouring in his eyes from its
support or opposition to the cause in which he was
embarked. When therefore he was engaged in this
vital struggle, and the ordinary Christian population
vacillated and fluctuated, and yielded to the storm
of persecution, and fell in with the court doctrine
whatever it might be, whilst on the other hand the
ascetics held fast the true faith under every change;
and not only this, but Antony the most revered and
influential of their body, was so moved in the holy
cause, that he broke through all the ties of habitual
solitude, and that fear of the allurements of ambition

135

young man? He believed the truth because it was
the ancient universal faith of .the Church.» He con-
firmed it from Scripture; but he had not. learnt it
from Scripture. If he had, he might have distrusted
his judgment. But it was not the produce of his
own meditations. It had been handed down from
the beginning, and was consonant with Scripture;
and therefore he contended and suffered for it.
Athanasius therefore is of value to us, not for his

yment, but as a witness ; as one witness amongst
many asa witness who showed that he was honest

suffering the loss of all things, and risking life
itself for the truth he had received. He is valuable,
moreover, as an example of what one faithful man,
of unflinching conrage, and unceasing perseverance,
ean do against the combination of all worldly power,
and the timidity or faithlessness of those who ought
to have supported him.

I return to give an account of Athanasius’ esti-
mate of celibacy, and of that of his contemporaries.
We find that young people who were not of age,
sometimes professed virginity, and that he admired
this power of Christ in them which led them so to
do'; we find him calling it an image of the holiness

: De Incarnatione Verbi Dei, 51, Tic obv avOpwrwy pera
Oavaroy, ij GAdwe, Cwy wept wapfeviac édicate, kai ok ddvvaroy
elvae ryy dperiy ravrny Ev dvOpa@moe; adX’ O iypérepog Dwrijp Kat
Trav mavrwy Baciheve Xpiord¢ roooirov ieyvev éy rH wEpi ravTHC
didackaXia, we Kai radia, phew ric vowipye Aula éryBavra, THY
brép Tov vépov EnayyéANeaOa wapOeviay,

137

But Athanasius goes further than this; he even
speaks of marriage itself, as Milton does, as a corrupt
thing and the first fruits of the fall'. Herein, how-
ever, of orthodox writers, he is almost or quite
alone; being, as we shall see, contradicted by the
great body of fathers and councils.
He testifies to the wide prevalence of ascetic
habits in his day: but it is doubtful whether any
thing like a modern monastery was then to be found.
The povasrnprov of his days seems to have been either
a single cell, not necessarily connected with any other,
or a collection of such cells. The progress of things
may be exemplified by the case of Antony. He first
lived in a single cell, in or very near Alexandria: from
hence he withdrew to a retired spot in the country,
and, his reputation rising, he was followed by those

ebgporbyn trav Nawy év raic ovrdieat wapotvvdyrwy a&ddZtjove Eic
ciperiy Idea rav dydpwy, mpdrepov oboa mpde yapor Erocuot,
Epeway mapbevor TG Xptor@; ldeot vewrepor, BAEworrec Erépove,
ror povipy Ploy iyyawnoay; [deo warépec mpoérpewoy rexva ;
méoo. of kal rapa réxywy ijiwOnoav py EurodigeoOat ric év
Xptor@ doxicewc; Udeoa yuvaixec trevcay dvOpac; wéoa de mapa
ae éxeioOnoay cyohale TH mpocevyy, we eiwev 0 Ardorodog ;
* Expositio in Psalm. 1,7. Exes) 6 xpoqyopotpevoce oxordc
rov Geod jv rov pi) dia yapou yéverOar Hpac cal pBopac* h ce
mapa/aate rij¢ évroAije rov yapor eiaiyayer Out TO dvopijoa rov
*Adtp, ror’ tori dOerijaa roy ék Oeod dofévra abr@ vdpov ..0. »
To de wait év dpapriac, kK. Tr. A. onpaiver re ) Eva wavrwy
yay i) pyrip mpwrn éxiconce rv apapriay, waerep opyaoa rijv
jéovhy. It must be observed, however, that it is doubted, even
by the Romanist Dupin, whether this commentary is really
Athanasius's,

139

Church in his day, which wrought most powerfully
with the heathen'. It is evident likewise from their
regular attendance publicly in the churches, that
there was no seclusion as yet introduced amongst
them, although they veiled themselves? From his
mention likewise of monks who married and had
children, it is evident that the profession was not
irreversible *; and from that of bishops who became
fathers, that they were not yet bound to the rule
proposed in the council of Nice, and negatived
there,

The first Synod of Carthage, which was held a.p.
348, the year of Athanasius’s first return from exile,
added nothing to the stringency of the celibate. It
merely prohibited those who had taken the vow,
and widows, from haying persons of the other sex
living with them‘, for the sake of avoiding scandal

* Epist, ad Dracontium, 7. “H obyi péya onpeioy xdpny rot-
Heat wapVevevery, Kal vewrepoy EyKpareveobar;

De incarnatione Verbi Dei, 48. Tapirw yap 6 Bovhdpevoc, rai
Bewpeirw Tic pev aperiic TO yrwpiopa év raic Xmorov rapOévorc
kal Ev rotc¢ owhpoovvny ayvevovat vewréepore, ric Ce aavaciag rijy
niarty tv TY Tooo’TY THY papripwy abrod yopy. See moreover
note’ p. 136, ravrac dé "EXAnvec &. T. A.

® Historia Arian. 56. Ta d€ réy wapBévev aya copara
Karékonroy wAnyaic of deo (the Arians), etAxovre ra okerdopara
kal Tac Kepahac a’rav Eyujvour.

* Epist. ad Dracont.9. To)ddol de rév éxtoxdrwy obde yeya-
pijwact, povayol 6& wartpec rékvwv yeydvaow* Gawep wal ém-
akdrove warépac Tékvwy Kal povayovc é& 6XoKAijpov yévove rvy-
xorrac.

©) Canon tii. and iv.

K 2

141

and as it were the garment and robe of the soul; if
then it be abandoned by the soul to fornication, it
becomes unclean; but if it dwell with a holy soul,
it becomes the temple of the Holy Ghost.

“And as to the doctrine of chastity, above all,
let the order of solitaries and of virgins attend to it,
who are establishing in the world an angelic life ;
and then the rest of the Church’s people also. Great
is the crown laid up for you, brethren; for a poor
indulgence barter not a high dignity,—Having been
enrolled in the angelical books for thy purpose of
chastity, beware lest thou be blotted out again for
thy deed of fornication.

“Nor again on the other hand, whilst observing
chastity, be thou puffed up against those who choose
the humbler path of wedlock. For ‘marriage is
honourable, and the bed undefiled, as saith the
Apostle. Thou too, who keepest thy purity, wert
@aprov* gay de ayia Wuyq cvvoujen, yiverac vad¢g “Ayiov Iveb-
POTOC. we ee ee

Kai rov repi cwhpocvyneg Adyor, tponyoupévwe pev akovérw Te
povagdvrwy cat ray mapbéivwy rd raypa ray Tov ladyyedov Bloy
ix Kéopy Karopfovvrayv. Méyac tpiv amdxeerat orépavog, adeddol,
Mi puxpac iéovic ayriuwaradddinre peyadny adiav. .. ..'Ev raic
evayyeducaic iGote ourdy éEyypadijon Cur rihv mpd0eow rjc
awppoctync. BAéwe pr) warty eLadecpOnje Cea ry wopvury épya-
aiay,

Mice ab wadiy xarop0iy rijy cwhpocvrvny rupdwOj¢ Kara Tay
broPenKirwy ev yap" riptoc yap o yapoc Kat } Kolrn dulavroc,
de onoiv 6 axdarodoc, Kal ov, 6 riy ayvelay tywv, dpa ob« éx
Toy yeyapnkdrwy éyevvynOnc; Mi yap, dre ypuaiov Krijoww exec, Td

143

of morals, he does unquestionably regard celibacy
as at the top of the tree; but not on account of
any impurity in marriage, which he takes pains to
deny.

Another passage will be sufficient to give a full
view of his doctrine and feelings ':

* Adored be the Lord, born of a oe let
the virgins understand what is the crown of their
own condition. Also let the order of Solitaries
understand the renown of chastity ; for we too are
allowed the same dignity. For nine months was the
Saviour in the womb of the Virgin; but the Lord
was a man for three-and-thirty years; so that if a
virgin has to boast of those nine months, much more
we of those many years.

“ But run we all by the grace of God the race of
chastity, young men and maidens, old men and chil-
dren; not going after licentiousness, but praising
the name of Christ. Let us not be ignorant of the

* Cat. xii. 33. pooxvveicOw 6 éx rapSévov yervynbele Kuproc,
Kal yrwpiérwoay ai rapHévor rijc vixeiag wodirelac Tov orédavoy,
Trwpigérw de roy povaldvray ro rdypa rig dyvelacg ro émidokoy"
ov yap dmecrephueOa rod ric dyvelac dkwparoc. "Ev yaorpl pév
mwaplevou yéyovey 6 rou Swrijpoc évveapnviaiog 6 ypdvoc, avijp dé
yéyovey 6 Kipwe rptixovra cai rpia ern’ wore ei cépviverae
mapbévoc dia tov évveapnveaiov ypovor, wohu paAAov hpetc dea
TO jWoAverec THY ypdywY,

Ildvrec de rov ric dyveiac Cpdpoy r@ Ocod yaprre dpapwper,
veavioxor Kai mapQévor, rpeoPirepor pera vewrépwy, obK dKohaciag
pertovrec GN’ aivodvrec ro byopa rou Xpiorov. M)) dyvohowpey
Tijg dyveiag TO Evdokov' ayyedukdg yap tort 6 orépavog Kal Urep

145

One passage more'; and I quit this Father.
“ Consider, I pray, of each nation, bishops, priests,
deacons, solitaries, virgins, and other laity; and then
behold the Great Protector and Dispenser of their
gifts: how throughout the world he gives to one
chastity, to another perpetual virginity, to another
almsgiving, to another voluntary poverty, to another
power of repelling hostile spirits.”

CHAPTER II.

THERE can be but little doubt that from this time
forward, for a very considerable time, the doctrine of
Cyril was generally held in the Church. I shall
therefore, in my further citations not think it neces-
sary to mention particularly those who agree with
him. But if I meet with any case which shows
that the Church was not committed to any false
doctrine on the subject, or any instances of persons
of eminence who do not appear to have gone to the
extent of tle general feeling, these I will mention.
The next writer then I will adduce is Zeno,

’ Cal, xvi. 22. BAéwe jot Exdorov eOvovg extoxdmove, mpec-
Burépove, cvaxdvove, povalovrac, wapQévouc, Kai Nowrovg Aaixove,
kal DAéwe rov peyay Upoorarny kai rev yapioparwy Udpoyoy,
drag éy wayTi To Koopy TO per dyvelay, ro O& decrapbeviay,
fit\Aw O& akrnpooiyny, GAAg aréXaow mvevparwy dyTuwKeperwy
didwor.

147

aged, ye are better than rocks of adamant. Exult
ye children; sweet and inestimable pearls of the
sacred tower. Exult ye happy marriages; ye
engrave gems preferable for adornment to 210s
selves. Exult ye widows: by the exact proportion
of your virtue ye unite in iadidage talths thi Glerkée
Stone. Exult ye virgins: ye adorn all these honour-
able conditions by the beauty of your own bloom.
Exult ye rich, &. Exult ye poor, &c.”

So again he classes together the chastity of mar-
ried persons and celibates: for in his sermon on
chastity’, after declaring that it was the cement of
society and of all domestic relations, he goes on thus
to apostrophize it. ‘“ How admirable art thou, O
chastity, who wouldst not be extolled in any other
way than by being kept, content with the single
ornament of a good conscience. Thou in virgins art
happy; in widows powerful, in married persons faith-

exultate conjugia: meliores ornatui gemmas sculpitis, quam vos
estis, Exultate viduw: quadratura vestra virtutis angularis
lapidis conjugio coheretis. Exultate virgines: omnem istam
celebritatem honore vestri floris ornatis. Exultate divites, &c.
Exultate pauperes, &c.

1 De pudicitia, Hee totius humani generis fundamenta con-
firmat; hc nominum proprietates universis affectibus preestat :
hee parentum, conjugum, liberorumque sacra jura custodit.

Quanta est [Q. es] miranda pudicitia, que aliter laudari te
nonvis, quam ut custodiaris, solo bonz conscientia ornamento
contenta, Tu in virginibus felix; in viduis fortis; in conjugiis
fidelis; in sacerdotibus pura; in martyribus gloriosa ; in angelis
clara; in omnibus vero regina.”

149

love.” In what age of the Church shall we find a
juster appreciation of the true dignity of wedlock ?

Thus again Titus of Bostra, in Arabia Petrea,
(A. D. 362) expressly declares’, that the practice of
celibacy no more goes upon the idea of any impurity
in marriage, than that of fasting upon any sin in eat-
ing; but that both are taken up on the selfsame
grounds of discipline and humiliation.

It is very unfortunate that all the poems ascribed
to Damasus of Rome are spurious; else they might
have furnished Mr. Taylor some delightful specimens
of superstition, especially in the article of prayers to
saints, who happen to be virgins and celibates.
But even Bellarmine gives them up, and therefore
Mr. Taylor will scarcely like to avail himself of
them.

We therefore pass on to the Council of Gangra,
which is reckoned by Dupin to have been held about

? Contra Manicheos, ii. Sed quomodo esset in hominibus
decor pudicitiz private, nisi natura esset quod titillaret, et
ratione coérceretur? Ubi esset apud mulieres virginitas, aut
apud viros intractatio nuptiarum, nisi ratio amorem sanctitatis
haberet, que naturaliter certans eos, qui recte cupiditatem
insitam reprimunt et domant, victores declararet? idque non
ad contumeliam natura, sed ad exercitationem tolerantie et
sanctitatis. Sic sane cibis et potionibus delectamur, non cri-
minosa voluptate fruentes (naturalis enim hac est): et tamen
jejuniis nos exercemus; non quod est supra naturam contra
naturam exercentes, sed tolerantiam amplectentes, et Deum per
humilitatem placantes et propitium reddentes. Nunquam exer-
citationem jejunii susciperemus, nisi fames esset in corpore.

151

sixteenth is against those children who under pre-
tence of piety forsake their parents °.

The fathers of this council conclude in the fol-
lowing words': “ We ordain these things, not to
exclude those members of the Church of God, who
would, according to the advice of Holy Scripture,
discipline themselves: but those who use austerity for
a pretence to gratify their ambition, who despise
those who lead an ordinary life, and who introduce
innovations contrary to Scripture and the laws of
the Church. We admire virginity when it is accom-
panied with humility; we praise self-denial which is
joined with purity and prudence; we respect that
retirement from worldly business which is made with
humility: but we also respect the honourable inter-
course of marriage......In a word, we wish and
desire that those things may be observed in the Church,

Tos’, Ei rwa réxva yovéwy, pdktora miordy, avaywpoln mpo-
pdcer OcoveBeiac, dvabepa torw,

* Tavra d& ypdhoper, ovk Exxdmrovrec rove év rH éxKAnoig Tov
Oot cara rae ypapdc doxeiobac Bovdopeévove, ddAa Tove Aap/d-
vorvrag tiv wrdecw rijc dexhoewco cig Urepnpaveiay, Kara To
apehéotepoy ovrwy éxatpopévove re Kai mapa rd¢ ypada¢ Kai
rovg ékkAnovacriKovg Kaydvac KQUYLO[LOUG eloa'yorrac. “Hyeic
Tovyapoty Kai wapOeviay perd rarecvogpoctync Oavpalouer, cai
éykpareiay perd Ocove/Jeiac Kal cepvdrnroc ytvopévny amodexd-
peOa, kai dvaywpnow Trav éyKxoopiwy mpayparwy Kara raTetwo-
ppoovrnc amodeyéuefa, kal ydpov cuvolknow cemviy Tipdper
ose ae es Kal, wavra ovveddyrwe eimeiv, ra wapacoévra wo
roy Oelwy yoaday kat ray drooro\iKév wapaddcewy év TH éxchyoia
yiveoBac evydueba.

153

the regulation of parties on the spot in each separate
Church !

I searcely know in what better place than this
to introduce the compilation commonly called the
Apostolical Constitutions. They are known to be as
ancient as this period, for they are quoted by Epi-
phanius', whom I shall soon have occasion to adduce;
and they cannot as a whole have existed much above
fifty years earlier, because they mention church-offi-
cers, such as singers and door-keepers, which do not
appear earlier than this period*. They may there-
fore be taken as a fairer specimen of the general
feeling of the period of the Council of Nice than the
writings of any individual; and on that ground I
am sorry that I did not bring them forward at an
earlier stage of the discussion. They are known to
have been somewhat tampered with; but the pas-
sages I shall adduce are too primitive in sentiment
to have been any part of the doubtful matter. They
speak of celibacy, as a thing, not of duty, but of
choice, depending upon the power of the person
choosing it; taken up as a vow, and not made the
subject of special consecration; not to be lightly
profaned; not intended as a stigma upon marriage,
but to obtain leisure for devotion®: and they declare
the second marriage of professed widows to be a sin,

1 In Heres, 25 he quotes Lib. v. ce. 14, 17. of the Constitu-
tions; in H, 45 a passage towards the commencement; and in
A, 80. lib. i, c. 3.

* See Bingham, III. vi. 1. vii. 1.

* Const. Apost. IV. 14. Hept cé rije rapQeviag évrodjy obK

155

between the current feeling of the age in which
these sentiments were popular, and that of those
who would forbid to marry.

And whilst I am upon this subject, I must correct
an error into which [ fell on the subject of the
eouncil of Eliberis, through trusting too much to
the judgment of others. I have quoted the thirty-
third canon of that council as though it required the
clergy to abstain from the rites of marriage, whereas
it positively forbids them to cease their intercourse
with their wives’. The simple truth is that I trusted
to the general candour of Dupin in drawing up that
part of the history, and did not get a copy of the
canon till I was going to press; when I did not re-
mark that its language was directly in the teeth of
Dupin’s statement. We must therefore remember
that up to this time there was no restriction put
upon the marriage of the clergy in any part of the
Church, excepting that they were not allowed to
marry after ordination.

CHAPTER. IIL.

From councils we return back to fathers, of whom
we have a whole host contemporaries; Epiphanius
and Ephrem Syrus, Basil and the Gregories of Nazi-
anzum and Nyssa, Ambrose and Jerome; who have

’ Placuit in totum prohiberi episcopis, &c. abstinere se a

conjugibus suis el non generare jilios.

157

from their wives, or from widowers who have been
only once married. He likewise declares’ it to be
a sin for a person who has determined celibacy to
turn back to marriage; and the ground he takes is
that which I have already adverted to, that St. Paul
declares that those professed widows who married
again, incurred condemnation thereby.

From Ephrem Syrus, who was so determined
a solitary, that he never chose to rise above the
order of deacon, and absolutely refused to be a
bishop, we should naturally look for excited notions
upon the subject of celibacy. Accordingly we are
not surprised to find him exclaim *: “ Blessed are
those who practise self-denial; blessed are they who
keep their baptism pure; blessed are they who for-
sake this world for the sake of Christ; blessed are
the bodies of virgins; blessed are they who have
wives as though they had them not.” Neither again

IT. i.6, Wapédweav roivvy ot dywe Oeov amderokan rH
ayig Qeov exxdneiag, épapaproy elvae To, pera ro oploa: wapbeviay,
el¢ yapov rpéreoOa. In support of this assertion he quotes
1 Tim. v. 11; and then proceeds, Ei rofvvy cai pera weipay
Kdopov ynpevoaca yuri), did rd rerayOar ry Oep, Eretra yhpaca
kpipa thet, dOerjoaca rv mpwrny rior’ woow ye paddoy #) Kal
auryy dvev meipac Kdopov avabeica rapbévoc Oey, yauhoaca’
mie obyi padNoy airy brép wepioood Kareorpnviace Xprorod, Kai
ry peifova rior HOérnoe, kai Ee kpiua a¢ avayadacbeioa rijc
idiac kara Oeov wpolécewe ;

* On Sorrow for Sin, Maxapiot of éyxparevopevot" paxdptor of
ro Pamricpa ayvov pvAdiavrec* pakapeoe of did tov Xptoroy
imoraldpevot Tp Kéop~ TovT@’ pakdpra ra cwpara Tay wapbérwyr"
fakd poe of Exovreg yuvatkag we pl) EXovTEC.

159

but to rein in our feelings by the fear of God. For
the truly continent is he who has the desire of the
eternal good things, and fixing the eyes of his mind
upon them turns away from lust. He abhors fleshly
intercourse, as nothing but a shadow. He does not
rejoice in the countenance of women, nor delight in
their figures, nor yield to their graces, nor please
himself with their sweet breath, nor is taken with
words of flattery. He does not frequent the com-
pany of women, especially of the unguarded, nor
spend his time in their conversation. The truly
manly and self-denying person, who reserves himself
for that infinite bliss, keeps a check upon every
imagination, and masters every lust, through desire
of a better life, and fear of the life to come.” This
is but a specimen of his sentiments: but, as he
writes much to ascetics, and upon subjects connected
with their mode of life, which he evidently regards
as an anticipation of heaven, we might fill pages
with similar extracts. They show at all events that

Tig capxoe, G\Aa Yativoiy TG G6By rot Ocod ra way. ‘O yap
cAnbde Eyxparije éxelvdg torw, 6 txwy émupiay trav aavarwy
ixelywy aya0dy, cat rpdc abra drevifwy T~ VY, TaUTHY arooTpE-
gerat Tiy émOupiar, Thy avvoveiay Bdekvocerat, we oktay Ti
oboary* mpoowroc ray Onecav ov yaipet aupacw ov réprerat*
KadNeoty ob cuperitrer’ amvoate hdlerate oly ijdiverac’ déyote
koAakelac ov dededZerat’ pera Dede, kal padtora aotpvwy, ob«
évoedeyifer’ év dpidiatg yvvaawv ove éyxpovige. ‘O adnfthje
divdpetoc Kal éycparijc, Kal éavroy rnpdy eic Exelyny thy aperpoy
avaravew, éri TayToc Aoytopou éyxpareverat, kal mdone exfupiac
kparel, érBupig rou «peirrovoc, Kal ddfJp rov péAdovrog ai@voc,

161

nenee in the Christian world, and especially with
his friend Gregory of Nazianzum.

My first extract shall be from his letter to Eusta-
thius of Sebastea, after the breach between them,
occasioned by the false dealing of Eustathius, who
had joined the Arian party. It appears that he
was the son of Christian parents, in comfortable
circumstances, and after a domestic education went
to finish his studies at Athens, in company with
Gregory, where he seems to have gained a taste for
the heathen philosophical writers, which he kept up

* After spending much time',” he says, “in vanity,
and wasting almost all my youth in vain labour,
bestowed in persevering endeavours to acquire a
knowledge of that wisdom, which with God is folly;
when at length I awoke as out of a deep sleep, I
fixed my eyes upon the wonderful light of the truth of
the Gospel, and saw clearly the inutility of the wisdom
of the rulers of this world who come to nought; with
deep regret for my wretched course of life, I desired
that a guide might be given me, to introduce me to

'"Eyw mokuy ypdvoy mrporavadwoac Ty parawryrt, Kal wacay
oxeday ry gpavrov vedryra évagavicac rH paraorovig, iy elxov
mpocdtarpipwr ry avadiler rev palypdrwr rij¢ rapa rov Oeow
pwparOelanc aodlac, éreidh wore, Waorep é& trvov Balog dtava-
orac, aré/J\eva pey mpoc¢ To Navpacroy we Tijc aAnGetag rod
ebayyediov, xareidov dé ro d&ypnarov rij¢ gopiag THY apyorTwy Tou
ai@voc Tovrov roy Karapyoupévwy" wokAa@ Tiy EdeeLviy pov Cwnpy
droxdaveac, nixopny dobijval por xetpaywyor rpoy Tiy sioaywyhy

163

being bowed down by no necessity of nature, keep-
ing the bent of their souls always lofty and unen-
slaved, in hunger and thirst, in cold and nakedness,
not giving way to the body, nor submitting to bestow
any thought upon it, but as though living in bodies
not their own, they showed practically how to be
sojourners here, and how to have their home in
heaven. Wherefore admiring and blessing the life
of these men, how they show practically that they
bear about the death of Jesus in the body, I was
desirous as far as I was capable of it, to imitate them.
For this end, seeing some in my own country endea-
vouring to imitate them, I thought that I had found
a help towards my own salvation. And I made out-
ward things a declaration of things invisible; for
since our inward thoughts and feelings do not
appear, I thought humility of dress a sufficient in-
dication of humility of mind, and the coarse cassock

roby br’ ovdepiac dvotkiic avayene Karaxaprrdpevot, Wbyddr del
Kai ddovhwroy rijc Wuyijc To dpdrnua ciacwZorrec, Ev Ays@ cal
diy, év Woyee kal yupvdrnri, po) exvorpe@dpevat TPde TO CGpa pce
karadeydpevor abr@ mpooavahdaat riva gpovrida’ GAN, we Ev
adAarpig TH oapKi udvyorrec Epyw Edeckay, ri rd wapotKeiv roig Woe
kai ri TO wodirevpu tye év ovparg. ‘Exeiva Qavpdoac, cai paxa-
pioac Tay avcpar rihv Cony, dre Epyw Ceckvevouct Thy véKowaw Tov
‘Inoov év rH cwpart weptpipovrec, niryopny Kai abroc, Kad’ door
éuol editor, Cyrwri¢ elvac Trav avdpav Exelywv, Tovrov yovr
itvexev, Deaodperde rivag éml rij¢ warpidve Lndoiy ra éxelvwv ére-
xelpovrrac, Evduroa viva Bohfeav evonkéevac mpdc riv épavrod
cwrnpiav. Kai awddekey erocovpny trav dparay ra opwpeva’ eet
oby ddnha ra Ev Te KpUTTw ExaoTOV oY, IyyounNY abrapKy
eppipara elvae Tie TaTewodpocurne To TaTEvoy Tov Evduparoc.

165

Gregory (of Nyssa) that you have been for some
time wishing to cast in your lot with me; and he
adds that you have even determined on it: but
partly haying become slow to believe it from fre-
quent disappointments, and partly being distracted
with business, I could wait no longer; for [ must
set out for Pontus, where by the blessing of God, I
trust some time to rest from my roamings. For I
have with difficulty bid adieu to the vain hopes
which I had in you,....and departed to seek my
sustenance in Pontus, where God has pointed me
out a place exactly suited to my turn of mind, such
as we often used, when at leisure, to amuse ourselves
in fashioning together in imagination.” He then
describes ' a very picturesque and delightful retire-
ment, at the fuot of a woody hill, shut in by a moun-
tain stream, and two dzep dells, abounding in flowers
and fruits and fish, free from wild beasts, excepting
such as furnished amusement and food to the sports-
man, and possessing only one access, of which he
himself had the entire command. With this picture
he hoped to wile Gregory into joining him.

This letter appears to have been followed by two
of playful banter from Gregory, to which he replied
in another of great interest, which I need not tran-
scribe, after the beautiful paraphrase of it given by

* Mr. Newman has translated Basil’s own words in his
“Church of the Fathers,” doing that justice to them which no
one, not gifted with the spirit of poetry, can do,

167

calming his mind and preparing it for the reception
of divine truth. He purposed with his companions
(for he had already been joined by one or more) to
begin the day, and to accompany his labours, with
prayer and praise; and expects that when the tongue,
the eye and the ear are no longer made the inlets of
dissipation, the mind may fall back upon itself and
ascend to the contemplation of Almighty God.
“ But,” he says, “the chief way of discovering duty
is the study of the inspired writings: for in these
are found the treasuries of practice, and the lives of
blessed men are handed down in writing, and lie
before us as living patterns of heavenly conversation
for imitation in our actions. And therefore, where-
insoever any one discovers himself deficient, by
dwelling upon it, he finds, as from a public dispensary,
the appropriate remedy for his peculiar infirmity.”
This subject he carries on into instances. He then

céopov mayrdég, Kdepou de avaywpnotc, ov rd tkw avrov yevéobat
gwparias, AMAA Tij¢ Pde TO gHpa cuprwableiac ry Wuyxiy aroppi-
fac....4. ‘Erouacia dé xapdiag i) dropabnow ray Ex Twovnpac
auvnlelac mpokareyovrwy abriy dwWaypdarory..... Lpo¢ 0 rovro
péytorov bdedog ipiv i Epypia wapéyerat, karevydgovea iypdy ri
mwaOn Kets ss » 1 Meyiarn 0€ b6d¢ mpd¢g ry row Kabijxorroc
Eupeoww Kai i pehern tev OsorvevoTwY ypadar* ev ravrac yap Kai
ai tov mpdkewy iroijxac etploxovrac' cai ot Bick roy paraplwy
avopay, avaypanTot Tapacedopevor, olor eikdvec Tiveg Epipyyot Tie
kara Qeor wodcreiac, ro putpHpare Tay Epywy wpoKervrat, Kai
Toivuy, wept ovrep ay Exacroc evcewe EXovroc éavroy aicbaryrat,
éxelvp mpvodiarpi(jwy, olov ard tevog Kawod iarpslov rd mpdapopoy
evpioker T@ Appworhpare dappakoy K.T.A.

169

underwent no change, but rather increased with age ;
and the severities he first practised in his youth he
introduced with augmented rigour into the rules
which he gaye to the societies he founded. His
patronage of these institutions was in after life ob-
jected against him. One of his replies we have
ev given. The other we find in the letter

ressed by him to the clergy of Neo-Cesarea,
alan on a visit in their neighbourhood to the place
of his former retirement '.

“1am accused because I encourage men devoted
to religion, who have bid farewell to the world and
to all worldly cares, which the Lord likens to thorns
which do not allow the word to spring up and bring
forth fruit. Such men bear about in the body the
dying of the Lord Jesus, and taking up their cross
follow God. Now of all my life I most cherish this
my offence, that I have with me, and under my
direction, men who have chosen this discipline.
And now I hear that the same excellence is to be

1 "Eycadovpeba bé drt cai dvOpwrovg EXopev rife evoeBelac
dexyrac, droratapévove tg Kocpw Kai maoate Taig Piwrunic pepi-
pevate, dc dkdvOarc rapecalet 6 Kipuoc, cic kapropopiay dve\Oeiv roy
Adyor pi} cvyywpoveatc. Oi rowdroe riy vexpornra rov ‘Inaod éy
T~e cwpare wepipépovar, kal dipayrec TOY EavTawY cTavpoy Erovrar TY
Gg. “Eye dé wavroce Gy ripnoaipny rot éuavrod Blov éuc elvar
ri ddtKcipara ravra, kal ixetr dvdpac wap’ éuaurg, ba’ Euoi dwda-
cKaAw, THY tioKnow rainy mpoEhopévovc. Noy de év Aiywarw pev
akovw Trovaurnv clvacdydpoy dperhy" kui raya revec Kal emt rij¢
Tlakatorivne rv cara 76 ebayyédwor wodtreiay KaropQovew* dKovw
dé rivag Kal iwi rij¢ péone tHy worapmy redciovc Kai paxaplouc

17]

panies of men and women whose conversation is in
heaven, who crucify the flesh with the affections and
lusts, who care not for food and clothing, but waiting
upon the Lord without distraction, give themselves
to prayer night and day; whose mouths discourse
not of the deeds of men, but sing hymns to our God;
who continually labour with their own hands, that
they may have to give to him that needeth.” He
then describes their mode of worship at matins, be-
fore day-break; how they began with prayer; then
dividing into two companies chanted the psalms
alternately; next attended to the reading of the
Scriptures; afterwards had an anthem sung by a
single person, the rest joining in the chorus; and
finally at day-break united in the fifty-first Psalm,
each person making the words apply to his own
case: and he affirms that this custom prevailed in
Lybia, in the Thebais, in Palestine, in Arabia, in
Pheenicia, in Syria, on the Euphrates, and indeed
wherever watching and prayer and congregational
psalmody was practised. |

This then was the Basil whose opinions we have
to consider; these were the regulars, mostly laymen,
whom he patronized: and these were his views of
the ascetic life, and of monasteries properly so called.

plac’ of ob pepyydar wept Bowudrwy Kai évdvpdrwy, dd’ drepl-
orarot Ovrec Kai evmdperpot T~ Kuplg, vuKroc Kal iéoag mpnonévovar
raic dehocow' dy TO arépa ov Nadel ra Epya rev dvOpwrwy, dAKa
WahAovety tuvoy ro Oep hw Cnvexwe epyalouevor raic Eavray
XEpolv, iva Exwouw peradiedvar roicg ypeiar Exover.

M 2

173

cise motive for this regulation was we are not in-
formed, further than that it was to avoid the sneers
of the heretics against the laxity of discipline in the
Church. It was, however, evidently nothing more
than a rule of discipline, to meet a peculiar irregu-
larity. But still we may think that such a rule was
an evil; and though the ill effects of it might not be
immediately visible, time was sure to bring them out.
But still this was only Azs rule, it was not as yet that
of the universal Church. He likewise introduced
the custom of binding monks by an explicit vow,
which had not prevailed previously’. ‘So that com-
pulsory celibacy made great strides wherever he had
influence. This was not, however, forbidding to
marry in general: he expressly recognizes the right
of a widow who had taken no vow to marry again.
He only reasoned from St. Paul’s language in regard
to the Church widows, that when a vow was once
made to God, the infraction of it was to be restrained
by the Church; and admitting the propriety of

yap kai ry ExcAnoig mpdc dopadeay Avotredec, Kal roic aiperiKoic
ov dwoee Kal’ Har NaPiy, we Cea riv Tov dpapravey Adeav ée-
onrwptvwy mpdog Eavrove.

| Kav. 8. "Avdpwy dé bpodoylay obk Eyrwper, wha ei poh Teves
Eavrove TH Taypare ray povaddvrwy éycarnpiOunoar, of Kara TO
gwrispevovy doxovat wapadeyeoOae rv dyapiay, TlAjy wal én’
éxeivwy éxeivo iyoupae wponyeiobat mpoohkey, epwraicba abrove
kat NapPaveoOat rhv rap’ abray dporoyiay évapyij, dare érewar
perarieyrat poe TO piddoapKoy Kai hdovexdv Ploy, br@yew abrovg
TO THY TOpKEVOYTWY EmtTiUlg.

175

purity; because carnal intercourse is the necessary
channel by which original sin is propagated; and
therefore, although not sinful in itself, cannot be dis-
connected from pollution, in a more especial sense
than other human actions. There is, moreover, a
strict resemblance between the language he holds in
his canons, on the subject of the marriage of pro-
fessed virgins, and that which is used in this treatise:
so that there appears considerable ground for think-
ing that the greater portion of it was written by him:
and as the more extravagant language all occurs in
the latter part, it may be supposed not to have been
a part of the original treatise. Taking this, there-
fore, for granted, there are some parts of this treatise
which are especially worthy of attention.

For instance, he takes especial care to say that
when he magnifies and exalts virginity, he does not
mean merely strict bodily purity, which, be it as
strict as it may, he regards as merely the handmaid
of the true divine virginity of the soul. The passage
is so indicative of his sentiments that I will tran-
scribe it'. are

“Beyond doubt virginity is a great thing, render-
ing man (to say.all in one word) like to the incor-
ruptible God. But it does not pass from the body
to the soul, but being especially the property of the

* Méya per yap, &¢ adnOdc, wapOevia, rg apOdprw Cag, we Ev
xeparal elreiv, Eopowica roy avOpwrov. ObKx awd awptrwv dé
dpa éxt Wuyae airy ddevet, GANA Woyije Tijc Aawparou obea éaipe-
roc, TH ravrnc Oeopirel wapevig Apbopa gpudarree Ta owpara,

177

habits had led St. Basil to the same view of the
depths of religion which St. Paul had, when he
penned these words: (2 Cor. iii. 18,) * But we all,
with open face beholding as in a glass the glory of
the Lord, are changed into the same image from
glory to glory.” It is very true that he took a
mystical view of religion. Ie did look to the con-
templation of the Divine Being, as a means of being
brought to a resemblance of Him: and for that
purpose thought it expedient that the soul should
have as few impediments as possible to this habitual
contemplation. Now earthly pleasure of every sort,
he regarded as having the effect of binding us to
earth, and therefore avoided it, not in the light so
much of a thing which polluted, as of one which
disturbed the mind. When the soul therefore could
habitually turn to the contemplation of God, he re-
garded it as having attained to absolute virginity,
to perfect union with God. The language to us
seems strange, as the whole machinery of the book
of Canticles does, but it was not necessarily incor-
rect. The bodily virginity was therefore not sought
for its own sake, but because without it, the mind
could not expect to be able to “wait upon the Lord
without distraction. The misfortune was that many
persons, mistaking their vocation, would have so
sharp a contest with the flesh, that the preliminary
step of weaning themselves from animal pleasures,
would take up all their efforts; and their view
would thus become limited to the corporeal celibacy,

181

unknown, and that if the ideas of Basil were above
those of Christians at large, it was because the Gos-
pel had to contend with the degraded ideas of the
married state generated by heathenism, just as in
the time of St. Paul himself. It is perfectly clear
that Basil’s views were precisely those of the patri-
archs of the Old Testament : and, polygamists though
they were, it is by no means certain, that marriage
amongst us has become purer by recognizing the
passion commonly called love, as the ordinary pre-
-paration to it; a passion in most persons totally
distinct from true affection, and the more intensely
it is felt, the less likely to terminate in real love.
But let us turn from the recluse Ephrem and
Basil, the great promoters of monachism, to the
married Gregory of Nazianzum, the personal friend
of Basil, but a man who was more capable of feeling
the strength of domestic ties. His father had been
converted at mature age through the instrumentality
of his wife, and he had reason therefore to speak
well of marriage: he accordingly thus expresses his
feelings': “Marriage is honourable; but I cannot
say that it is higher than virginity. For virginity
would not bea great thing, if it were not more
honourable than that which is itself honourable... ..

' Orat. iii. Kaddy 6 ydpoc. “ANN oie Eyw Néyerw Sre val inby-
Aérepoy wapbeviac’ ovde yap ay Hy re peya iy wapUevia, jor) Kadod
Kaka ruyyavovoa. ..... TAjy addnjAae cvrdecpeiobe Kai
maplévoe kal yuvaixec, Kai Ey éore Evy Kupip wal addtjhwy Kadhw-
mopa. Obx av iy dyapoc, ei po) yapoc.

179

rupts her soul with unbridled thoughts, and her body
with unrestrained wantonings. Much more prefer-
able would it be to be united to a husband and to
have him to guide her conduct, and both to re-
compense him for his oversight of her, by making
herself a useful aid in his house, and bring up his
children, so that they may take care of him in his
age and keep up his family; and so through her
husband’s jealous care in one way at least be a
virgin to God.”

Now all this is so strangely different in sentiment
from what we haye seen in other passages, that it
is very difficult to reconcile them: so that as I have
hinted, many persons have been led to think that
the more extreme views were introduced into the
treatise by copyists. The very circumstance of
speaking of the employments of a married woman
with respect, and as a divine appointment, and the
very end of creation, and of purity in that state, as
being one method of consecration to God, is so con-
tradictory to the idea of matrimonial intercourse
being a pollution: and especially the recommending
a professed virgin to marry, is so contrary to the
energetic remonstrances made against such a step
in other parts of the treatise, that it is inconceivable
that the same feelings should have existed in the
same mind at the same time.

When he comes to speak of marriage again, as it
ought to be entered upon, in support of his idea that
the marriage of a professed virgin who has fallen

185

and creditable, she also brought her husband to feel
with her, and found him consequently, not an arbi-
trary master, but a good fellow-servant. Not only
this, but she also made the fruit of her body, her
children and her children’s children, the fruit of the
Spirit; conseerating to God her whole family and
all her substance, in return for [her own] one soul,
and rendering also wedlock a subject of praise
through her admirable conduct in it, and the good
fruit she produced from it.”

How much does this panegyric speak! Does it
not show clearly that one of the great reasons why
marriage was not looked on as it ought to be, was
that in fact there were so few instances in which it
was made to adorn the profession of the Gospel:
that the state was not generally redeemed from the
grossness into which paganism had plunged it? But
when we see the Gospel raise and sanctify that
state, the natural consequence is that it obtains its
proper honour. At the same time we may observe in
this Father, fully as much as in the greatest ascetic,
that a wrong estimate of the excellence of virginity
was prevalent; for if it had been restricted to its
proper use, it could not have been regarded as more
perilous than matrimony. It is only when persons
continue in it, who have no natural or acquired fitness

caprov, ra réxva Aéyw Kai réxva réxvwy, kaprov Tov [vetparog
éxothoaro’ yévog Gov kal vikiay dAnv dyri pede Wuyijc Og Kab-
ayvicaca, Kai rojcaca Kal yapoy exatveroy Gud ripe €v yap evape-
arijaewe Kal ric KaAdie évrevOev Kapropopiac,

187

whilst at the same time they appear to cast an
indirect slur upon it. The Scripture reguired them
to acknowledge that it was honourable, and the
experience of too many persons fold them that they
at least had not made it pure.

But in this age, viz. the post-Nicene, the tide,
as I have said, in the east at least, appears to have
taken a turn. So Amphilochius, the friend of the
Gregory from whom I have just quoted, has language
in direct praise of marriage, although he himself
appears for a considerable period to have led a soli-
tary life. So in his third discourse he speaks
thus; '“ Now honourable marriage excels every
earthly gift; as a fruitful tree; as a pleasant plant;
as the root of virginity; as the cultivator of intelli-
gent and living branches; as the blessing of the
increase of the world; as the encourager of the
species; as the fashioner of mankind; as the painter
of the divine image; as having obtained the Lord’s
blessing; as having been privileged to sustain the
whole world; as being intimately connected with
him who humbled himself to become man; as being
able to say boldly, behold me, and the children

* Orat. iii. 'O dé ripwe ydpog trepketrar wavrog dwpov yyivov"
we Eyxaproy dévdpor" we dareiov gurdw we pila ric wapbeviac’ we
yewpyoc ray oyiKwwy cai Eeuiywr Kradwv" we evhoyla rijg Tov
Kdopov avincewc' we Taphyopo¢ rov ‘yevouvc’ we Onuovpyoc Tii¢
dvOpwrdrnrocg’ we rijc Oeixie eixdvoc Cwypaoct w¢ rov Aeondrny
evAoyotvra Kekrnpévoc’ we wayra Tov Kécpor épey dexdpevoc’
we éxeivy wodtrevdpevoc, ov Kal évavOpwrijcat éEdvowrycer* we
évvapevoc Kéyerw pera mappyoliac, “Idov éyw kai ra radia & poe

N 2

189

“ Virginity is a matter of choice and not of duty
...+.Panul the Apostle. .... taught how married
Christians ought to live: but when he was asked
what order he would make concerning virgins, he
answered that there was no commandment .

“In regard to virginity, Paul delivers not pre-
cepts, but advice: he neither hinders those who
desire it, nor urges or constrains those who desire
it not. ‘ He who gives his virgin does well, but he
who does not give her does better: this is the lan-
guage of advice, nor are there any precepts conjoined
with it, either of what wool their coifs ought to be
made, or,” &c.

I need scarcely ask, what can be more moderate?
And yet this was the countryman of Cyprian and
Tertullian.

St. Gregory of Nyssa was brother of Basil the
great, and though married himself, may therefore be
supposed to be prejudiced in favour of celibacy. In
fact he wrote a treatise, in which he sets forth the
advantages of celibacy and the inconveniences of
marriage. But he is so far from insisting upon

quomodo conjugales Christiani debeant vivere: a quo cum
quereretur quid de virginibus preeciperet, respondit nihil esse
mandatum.

Non precepta sed consilium erogat Paulus ad virginitatem ;
nec impedimento est volentibus, nec nolentes impellit aut cogit.
‘ Qui dederit virginem suam bene facit, et qui non dederit melius
facit:’ hae sunt verba consilii; nec ulla sunt pracepta con-
juncta, vel de qua lana mitella fieret, &c.

191

barrenness denied them.” From another passage!
we learn that the Church was so far from forbid-
ding to marry, that whosoever publicly condemned
marriage incurred the penalty of excommunication.
He expressly declares that virginity * is not for the
many but for the few, that it is above * the generality
of persons, and rather to be wished for than enjoined.
He uses the same language which we have before
met with, as to the various but not discordant merits
of the various conditions of celibacy, widowhood, and
marriage. *“ The Church therefore is a farm rich
in various products. Here you may behold the shoots
of virginity teeming with blossoms; then, as in the
glades of a forest, widowhood excelling in the depth
of its foliage; in another quarter the corn field of
the Church filling the granaries of the world with

‘iv. 10. Vidit illibatum et illibate castimoniz virum :
suadet ut nuptias damnet, quo ejiciatur ab ecclesia, et studio
castitatis a casto corpore separetur,

7 De Virginibus, 1. v. 35. Non itaque dissuadeo nuptias, sed
fructus sacratz virgifitatis enumero. Paucarum quippe hoc
munus est, illud omnium. Nec potest esse virginitas, nisi habeat
unde nascatur.

* § 23. Non enim imperari potest virginitas sed optari: nam
qu supra nos sunt, in voto magis quam in magisterio sunt.

* De Virginitale, § 34. Est ergo Ecclesia ager diversis foe-
cundus copiis, Hic cernas germina virginitatis flore vernantia ;
illic tanquam in campis silvyz viduitatem gravitate pollentem ;
alibi tanquam uberi fruge conjugii Ecclesize segetem replentem
mundi horrea, ac veluti maritatz vinez feetibus torcularia
Domini Jesu redundantia, in quibus fidelis conjugii fructus exu-
berat,

193

eligible persons could not be found for the priest-
hood. But that celibacy by itself was no recommen-
dation, he expressly declares'; and shows by his
expressions, that there was a strict inquisition into
the character of those who were to be ordained.
This had now been necessary, even from the time
before the council of Nice; for the Church afforded
stations of influence and power, if not of great
wealth; and now that persecution no longer kept
out the unprincipled, it was become still more im-
perative. The Church offered a station exempt from
bodily labour, and attended with a certain degree of
honour; and although the emoluments were not
great, they were sufficient for unmarried men. To
those, therefore, who understand human nature, it is
not to be wondered at that exclusion should now be
necessary, when formerly it was difficult to find per-
sons to undertake the onerous responsibility of holy
offices. The confidence, likewise, which was reposed
by all ranks of men in the elergy, which had done
away, in a great degree, with the necessity of dea-
conesses, by permitting them free access to the females
of families, and to the virgins of the Church, began
to operate as a temptation to frivolous and pleasure-

* Et quomodo, inquies, frequenter in ordinatione sacerdotali
virgo negligitur, et maritus assumitur? Quia forte cetera opera
non habet virginitati congruentia. Aut virgo putatur et non est ;
aut est virginitas infamis ; aut certe ipsa virginitas ei parit super-
biam, et dum sibi applaudit de sola corporis castitate, virtutes
ceteras negligit.

195

quence, where persons of immature piety bound
themselves by a vow of celibacy. It naturally arose
from that vow, when the Church was no longer
hedged in by the thorny fence of persecution. And
accordingly from this time it seems to appear more
distinctly.

But the very fact, that with a keen perception of
these evils, when they appeared, such a man as
Jerome should have upheld religious celibacy with
all his power, shows at least that the general and all
but universal condition of the celibates must have
been granted to be pure. For he was a man bound
to no opinions but his own. He set at nought his
ecclesiastical superiors when he thought proper. And
he even ventured, in consequence of a systematic
study of the Hebrew originals of the Old Testament,
to set all antiquity at defiance, and to dislodge the
Septuagint version of the Scriptures from that high
veneration in which it was held in the Church. So
that he, at least, was not shackled by the voice of
his contemporaries. He owns moreover that he did
not belong to the celibatic order. And the natural
conclusion therefore to which we come, is, that the
moral condition of those of that order had not
sustained any general deterioration in his time.

Neither in his estimation of virginity did he
venture upon detracting from marriage. He ex-
pressly acknowledges that it was good in itself ';
and argues that the very fact of comparing virginity

* Epist. xviii. ad Eustochium, Dicat aliquis, Et audes nuptiis
detrahere, quze a Deo benedict sunt? Non est detrahere nup-

197

that they are not to be admitted to communion
again till after full penance.

The Council of Saragossa in Spain, which was held
the next year, is worthy of attention, both as showing
that an ascetic mania had spread into Spain, and
that more as a fashion than from a real self-denial,
and that there was that turn in the tide which I
have before noticed. For its sixth canon' decrees
the excommunication of those clergymen who should
forsake the active duties of their profession to be-
come solitaries; and the eighth* forbids virgins to
take the veil, that is, to profess themselves so pub-
licly, until they should be of the age of forty. When
the veil came to be the distinction of the female
celibate we do not learn; but that it was so at this
period appears very evident from the writings of St.
Ambrose.

The general Council of Constantinople, which was
held this year, made no decree on the subject of
virginity or the celibacy of the clergy: so that, as

nuptias sponte transierint, id custodiendum esse decrevimus, ut
peenitentia his nec statim detur, et cum data fuerit, nisi plene
satisfecerint Deo in-quantum ratio poposcerit, earundem com-
munio differatur.

' Can, vi Si quis de clericis propter luxum vanitatemque pre-
sumptam de officio sponte discesserit, ac velut observatorem legis
monachum videri voluerit magis quam clericum, ita de ecelesia
repellendum, ut nisi rogando atque observando plurimis tempo-
ribus satisfecerit, non recipiatur.

* Tbid. viii. Non velandas esse virgines, que se Deo yoverint,
nisi quadraginta annorum probata ztate quam sacerdos compro-
baverit.

199

before him in warning! the professed not to con-
temn marriage as a bad thing in itself, or as having
any thing of impurity in it, for that virginity’ of
soul is just as much the duty of the faithful gene-
rally, as virginity of person of a few. This last pas-
sage is especially worthy of observation, because it
shows that, whatever appearances there are of a
latent idea of inferior purity in marriage, it was not
one which was deliberately avowed; for the soul,
which is the real seat of purity, was regarded as
equally capable of purity in marriage as in celibacy.
Indeed four of St. Augustine’s letters (252—-255.)
are concerning a young lady, left in his guardian-
ship as bishop, for whom he was looking out for
a suitable opportunity of marrying.

The Councils of Carthage which took place in his
day, one in A.p. 397, a second in 398, and a third
in 401, and at which he, as bishop of Hippo, of
course assisted, give us some insight into the
practical working of celibacy. It was found neces-
sary in both the first to keep up the regulation
against clergymen having strangers for their house-
keepers or companions®. It appears from one of

* De sancta Virginitate, 18. Unde sectatores et sectatrices
perpetuze continentiz et sacrz yirginitatis admoneo, ut bonum
suum ita preeferant nuptiis, ne malum judicent nuptias.

Qui ergo sine conjugio permanere voluerint, non tanquam
foveam peccati nuptias fugiant; sed tanquam collem minoris
boni transcendant, ut in majoris continentize monte requiescant.

* Sermo 341. § 5. Virginitas corporis in paucis ecclesia, vir-
ginitas mentis in omnibus fidelibus esse debet.

* Concil. iii. Can. xvii, Ut cum omnibus omnino clericis

20]

It would seem likewise that in Africa, it now
began to be felt necessary to restrict the profession
of virginity: for we have a regulation that none
shall be allowed to profess till they are of the age
of twenty-five’. A particular habit appears to have
been established’: and although it was most usual
for the virgins to live with their friends *, there were
establishments in which those who chose, or were
destitute, might live in common, under the superin-
tendence of the bishop. St. Paul’s opinion concern-
ing those church widows who married a second time
was enforced by excommunication".

statuta, etiam ab uxoribus continere: quod nisi fecerint, ab
ecclesiastico removeantur officio. Ceteros autem clericos ad hoc
non cogi; sed secundum uniuscujusque ecclesi# consuetudinem
observari debere.

* Con. iii. Can. iv. Placuit ut ante 25 annos statis ned+dia-
coni ordinentur nec virgines consecrentur.

? Con, iv. Can. xi. Sanctimonialis virgo, cum ad consecra-
tionem suo episcopo offertur, in talibus vestibus applicetur, quali-
bus semper usura est, professioni et sanctimonize aptis, See
Can, civ.

* Con. iii. Can, xxxiii, Ut virgines sacre, cum parentibus
a quibus custodiebantur private fuerint, episcopi providentia, vel
presbyteri ubi episcopus absens est, in monasterio virginum vel
gravioribus feminis commendentur, et simul habitantes invicem
se custodiant; ne passim vagantes ecclesiz ledent existimatio-
nem.

* Con. iv. Can. civ. Sicut bonum est castitatis premium, ita
et majori observantia et preeceptione custodiendum est: ut si
qu viduz, quantumlibet adhuc in minoribus annis posite et
matura ztate a viro relicta, se devoverunt Domino, et veste

203

marry again ', nor the daughter of a bishop, priest,
or deacon, who had professed, marry at all, without
incurring the penalty of excommunication, not to be
relaxed till the death-bed*. It does not, however,
appear what penalty, if any, existed against the
marriage of other widows and virgins.

We now come to St. John Chrysostom, who like
all of his age wrote in favour of virginity, and espe-
cially thought it his duty to stand up in defence of
the ascetic life. I have already remarked a dispo-
sition to austerity in the writers of the western
chureh, which was not sanctioned by the eastern ;
and St. Chrysostom confirms my observation. The
great distinction is, that it does not appear that as
yet there was any punishment consequent on the
marriage of those who had taken the yow in the
eastern church, and that some of the eastern fathers
even recommended it in certain cases; amongst
whom was the father of whom we are now speaking.

* xviii. Si qua vidua episcopi sive presbyteri aut diaconi
maritum acceperit, nullus clericus, nulla religiosa, cum ea con-
vivium sumat, nunquam communicet; morienti tantum ei sacra-
mentum subveniat,

* xix. Episcopi sive presbyteri sive diaconi filia, si Deo
devota fuerit, et peccaverit et maritum duxerit, si eam pater vel
mater in affectum receperint, a communione habeantur alieni,
Pater vero causas in concilio se noverit prastaturum; mulier
vero non admittatur ad communionem, nisi marito defuncto egerit
peenitentiam. Si autem vivente eo secesserit et poenituerit vel
petierit communionem, in ultimo vitz deficiens accipiat commu-
nionem.

205

prize.” But he draws a most lamentable picture of
the state of society in Constantinople in his time. I
say of the state of society generally, for although no
doubt his subject leads him to specify the sins of
the professed virgins’, yet there are indications of
much general deprayity. Thus in his treatise in
favour of the monastic life, granting to his oppo-
nents that the vow was not always kept, and that
many monks quitted the monasteries in order to
marry, he affirms’ that there were fewer who did
so, than of those in ordinary life who quitted the
embraces of a wife for those of a harlot. When
society in general was thus polluted, was it sur-
prising that those who lived in the world, as the
consecrated virgins did hitherto, should become
occasionally polluted with the atmosphere that sur-
rounded them? But on the other hand, we must
bear in mind that he is not speaking of the Chris-
tian world at large, but of the population of a cor-
rupt capital. Let the condition therefore of the
church virgins have been as deplorable as it might
be there, and at Rome, is it right to conclude with-
out explicit evidence, as Mr. Taylor does, that it
was equally so elsewhere? Jerome, let us remem-
ber, was a clergyman of Rome, Chrysostom patriarch

1 De Virginitate, 8, Oiroc ydp devrepoc, paddov de Kat rpiroc
ipiv podvepdy cal dxabapoiac émwevdyrar rpdrog’ Kai al Tov
ydpov we évayh pevyovea aitg@ roirp TH gebyey mdyTWH Yyeyo~
vare évayeorépat, rapferiay eipovoa mopveiac puapwrépar,

* See note *, p, 204.

207

minuteness and stringency proves the growing cor-
ruption. Not, I imagine, that there were numeri-
cally fewer pious persons in the Church than for-
merly, but that they were so outnumbered by the
multitudes who now professed the Gospel, without
attempting te reduce it to practice. And even in
Chrysostom’s time, that was the case to a great
extent. It began with the cessation of persecution,
and had gone on increasing ever since.

But Lam desirous of carrying on the investigation
in a somewhat slighter and more perfunctory man-
ner to a much later period, for the purpose of show-
ing to what extent the Church, as a body, was
committed at any period to restricting marriage,
either amongst clergy, or amongst laity. I shall
therefore advance to the council of Chalcedon, in the
middle of the fifth century, which sat upon the
Kutychian controversy.

» But before I quote its canons, it will be necessary
to cite the remarks of M. Dupin, the Roman
Catholic historian, upon them. He says, “As for
myself, I much doubt whether this collection of
canons were made in any session of the council, but
do rather believe that they were composed since,
and taken out of the several actions. “Tis easy to
find the places.” Now, after this remark, we must
see how very doubtful it must be whether any of the
canons, which we cannot trace to something more
authentic than the “collection” of them, can be
regarded as canons of the universal Church.

209

is not lawful for those who have vowed celibacy to
break their vow. But after all, what is this but
declaring what we must all feel to be true? The
error was, a8 I have said, in urging persons to take
the vow, or in accepting it publicly: but on this
point the council only takes matters as it found
them, without defining either one way or another;
although it must be allowed that it gives the prac-
tice a sanction by regulating it.

If, however, the council of Chaleedon did eatinalty
ratify the first canon of Neocesarea, it was not
considered universally binding in the Church: for
(a. D. 459) we find a letter of Lupus, bishop of
Troyes, and Euphronius, bishop of Autun, to Thalas-
sius, bishop of Anjou, in which they say, that it is
better for the clergy to abstain from marriage, but in
this they must follow the custom of the Churches.

To show more strongly, that the professed canons
of the council of Chalcedon are to be received with
a degree of doubt, we will go on to the supplement
to the sixth general council of Constantinople, (some-
times called Quini-sext,) which indeed is not recog-
nized by Roman Catholics as a general council, for
reasons which will appear very obviously, when we
come to cite its canons.

The second canon acknowledges the authority of
the eighty-five canons, commonly called apostolical :
it recognizes them as apostolical, and consequently
shows that they must at that time have possessed
considerable antiquity; although many things in

211

that those who are about to be ordained deacons or
priests, should promise to have no further matrimo-
nial intercourse with their wives, we, following the
ancient rule of apostolical strictness and order, de-
eree that the lawful unions of priests shall remain
from henceforward established, by no means loosen-
ing the tie which binds them to their wives, or
depriving them of intercourse with each other at
suitable times; wherefore if any one should be found
worthy of ordination as subdeacon, deacon or priest,
let him by no means be hindered from advancement
to that degree, though cohabiting with his lawful
wife, so that we may not from henceforth be com-
pelled to insult marriage, which was instituted by
God, and blessed by his presence. ...... We know,
indeed, as the members of the Synod at Carthage

wapadedwoba déyvwper, rove pé\ovrag ciaxdvov i) mpeourépov
xetporoviac afuveda, Kafopohoyetv we obkért Taig avroy ovvar-
Tovrat Yaperaic® Hucic TH apyal@ éLaxodovbotrrec Kavove Tic aro-
oroktxijc axpifselac cat rékewe, ra Tay lepwy avdpdy Kara vopoue
cvvokéowa kai dnd Tov viv éppdabae BovAdpueOa, pydapwe abroy
Ti\Y Tpd¢ yaperag ovvaderay Ciadvovrec, i} AmocrEepovyrec abrove
Tij¢ mpoc GAAHAOve KaTa KaLpOY TOY TpOoHKOvTa Gpiiac’ Were, et Tee
dkwoc evpebein mpc yewporoviay irodtakovou 7) dtaxdvov i) tpea(urepou,
ouroc pindapac kwAvéoOw emt rowiroy Pabuor éuPiPagecBar, yaperp
cVIOKGY vopipy” prTE py Ev TH Tie KEtporoviac Katpy ararreicOw
opodoyeiv, We atooThonrat ard Tij¢ vopipov mpog THy vikelay yape-
TH Optdiag’ iva pn) evrevOer Tov ex Ocod vopobernGevra Kai cddo-~
ynlévra ri avrot wapovsig, yapoy cabvBpigeyr éxPracOGper" rij¢
rod ebayyediov dwrijc Bowonc, “A 6 Oscc x. tT. A. Kat row droordA\ov
dwdeKorroc, Titov roy yapor Kai rv Koirny apiayror, cal, Aécsoue
yuvacki, pop Chree Avo. “Iopev be, Wowep Kai oi ev Kapfayévy
ouvehOorrec, ric Ev [ily cepvdrnrog trav Aecrovpyay refépevor mpd-

213

Since, therefore, it is so abundantly clear from
this canon, that the whole Eastern Church strenuously
insisted on putting no restriction on the intercourse
of the married clergy with their wives ; and appealed
to antiquity as sanctioning their resolution, the con-
elusion to which we naturally come, is, that the
regulation respecting bishops was to avoid some
temptation, to which bishops were more especially
exposed. Now bishops had the management of all
the Church goods; and therefore lay under the
temptation of employing the public money in en-
couraging pomp and luxury at home: and it is, most
probably, with a view to the scandal arising there-
from, that this rule was made. At all events, we
have a distinct repudiation of any prohibition of the
marriage of the clergy generally, and a distinct denial
that there is any religious reason for abstinence from
matrimonial intercourse, on the part of clergymen of
any class. When, therefore, we find that in their
sixth canon' they declare, that no clergyman shall
marry after ordination, and that if any one wishes to
marry, it must be before he is ordained; and that by

' Kav. +. "Emecdi)) mapa roicg drooroducoicg Kavdaw ¢ipyras,
Twv ele KAipor xpocayperwy dyapwy poveve dvayvworac cai
Yddrac yapety" Kal ijpeic rovro wapadvAarrovrec, dpilopey dro
Tov viv pydapwc wrocakovoy i didkovoy ij mpec[urepov, pera
Tiv éx’ atr@ yetporoviay, tyeiw adeay avrg ovmerdy cvvoué-
owv" ei d& roiro roAphoot mojoat, Kabapelodw. Ei éé (ov-
ord ric rwy ic KARpov mpoepyopévwy yapou vopw cuvdrrecBar
yvval, mpd rij¢ row brodcacdvou 7} duaKdvou jj tpeaurépov yetpo=
Toviag Touro TparreTw.

215

literally rules the Eastern Church, but the spirit of
it has gradually departed: for although no bishop
can be a married man, and consequently the mem-
bers of that order are universally chosen from the
monastic order, celibacy is so far from being encou-
raged amongst the parochial clergy, that it is in
practice absolutely forbidden; every parish priest
being required to be married before he can be or-
dained. So that if any clergyman wishes to con-
tinue unmarried, his only course is to enter a convent.

In the Western Church, as it came more and more
under the influence of Rome, the marriage of the
clergy, and the monks and virgins, was more and
more restrained. Opinion condemned the marriage
of the latter, and at length it was generally visited
with excommunication, until the parties separated.
With regard to the former, they continued more
or less at liberty, until at length, in 1074, Pope
Hildebrand was able to procure a general obedience
to the rule, that all married clergymen should sepa-
rate from their wives, and that all thenceforth to be
ordained should make a vow of celibacy. But long
before this time it had been a rule in the greater
part of the West, always excepting England, that
no priest should cohabit with his wife, as we learn
from the complaints made by Ratramnus in the
ninth century, and by Leo IX., that the Greeks
not only permitted a married clergy to wait at their
altars, but also put no restraint upon them in regard
to their intercourse with their wives.

217

The ground which is taken is as follows: St. Paul,
(1 Tim. iv. 1—3.) foretells that “in the latter times
some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to
seducing spirits and doctrines of devils..... forbid-
ding to marry:” the Church as a body, did, in the
Nicene age, forbid to marry: therefore the Nicene
Church apostatized from the faith.

Now here the answer simply is: Negatwr minor.
It is not true that the Nicene Church, or the Church
of any age forbad to marry. We have seen the
nature of the regulations of the Church in that age.
We have seen that for a long series of years, be-
ginning at some indefinite time before the council
of Nice, it had been a rule pretty generally ob-
served, that no priest or bishop should marry after
his ordination. We have seen likewise that after
the council of Nice, it became a rule that Church
virgins, and afterwards that those who entered ascetic
communities, should not marry. So that the whole
extent of the sin of the Nicene Church (supposing
it to be a sin) is, that it forbad marriage to three
classes of persons, who from the nature of the case
must be a minority of the community, every individual
of whom had a previous choice in entering those classes or
not. How then can forbidding those to marry who
had the choice whether they would put themselves
under the prohibition or not, be construed into for-
bidding to marry? It is true that in thus arguing,
I exonerate the Roman Church from the charge
which has been brought against it of having this

219

Church at various times condemned these doctrines,
and excommunicated those who held them? What
if these things are evident upon the face of the
documents which every one must consult who wishes
to ascertain the state of the Nicene Church? What
then becomes of the judgment or competency to
reason from facts of the person who talks of the
“ascetic apostacy of the Nicene Church?” And yet
these are all facts. Some of the Gnostics, the Bogo-
mili, and the Eustathians, forbad to marry, and
commanded to abstain from meats, as esteeming
both abominations. The Council of Gangra (A.D.
370) condemned these doctrines; and the fifty-first
of the Apostolical Canons, which were authority at
all events in the post-Nicene Church, whatever they
may have been before that period, expressly deposes
and excommunicates those who abetted them’. I
trust I have sufficiently refuted the figment of the
“ascetic apostacy.”

CHAPTER VIL.

I now come to the last portion of my undertaking,
and that which I feel to be the most difficult. In
that which has gone before, all that has been requisite,
was to have a sincere desire to ascertain truth,

~* See likewise pages 191, 202, 212.
p 2

221

a more vivid idea and feeling of what the spirit of a
disciple of Christ ought to be, than their successors a
hundred years afterwards: for, in addition to all the
helps. those suceessors had, they possessed living ex-
amples, who had derived their spirit from the fountain
head. I will not pretend to determine how long that
influence might continue: but it is evident that in a
generation or two it would be extinct, and that all
Christians would be left to gather the spirit of the
Gospel from the Scriptures, and by the ordinary
means of grace, and the conduct of ordinary Chris-
tians, just as we have to do at present; with the
additional disadvantages of not having the Scriptures
so constantly in their hands as we may, and of being
surrounded with a grossness, in the heathen amongst
whom they lived, of which we have no conception.
Whatever therefore was not matter of necessary
doctrine, or embodied in positive institutions, would
be in great danger of becoming corrupted, and of
course the Christian spirit could rarely be seen in its
perfection. The efforts of what has been called
natural piety would have to be regulated by the Serip-
ture; and independently of the working of the
Divine Spirit, the true Christian temper could only
be kept up by an intimate and constant acquaintance
with the Scripture: whilst the aid of the Divine
Spirit would have to be sought in the use of the
ordinances of religion, and in the exercises of private
devotion. And only in proportion as the true Chris-
tian temper was kept up, would true principles pre-

223

subject rest upon Scripture, or his deductions and
reasonings from Scripture. It is from Scripture
that he draws his notion of the angelical nature
of a single life; it was from Scripture that he
reasoned to the comparative impurity of marriage.
It was from Scripture again that others, and finally
the Church at large, settled that it was heretical to
attach the term impurity to marriage. We have
found one of the interlocutors in Methodius taking
this ground, and Ambrose and Augustine, who of
all the Church writers, are most full and most syste-
matic on the subject, rest all their statements upon
Scripture. The angelical excellence of virginity, its
superiority to marriage in the abstract, its excellence
as a means of detaching ourselves from the world,
and training ourselves for heaven, the regarding
marriage as a state of comparative imperfection and
weakness and worldly-mindedness, the propriety of
married persons refraining from matrimonial inter-
course, and especially if the husband happened to
be a clergyman, the bindingness of the vow of celi-
bacy, and the sin and impurity of marrying after
having taken it, are all deductions from Scripture,
and deductions so natural from the passages appealed
to, (independently of inference from others, or of
experience,) that it can never be wonderful that any
set of persons should have drawn them; and it is
only wonderful that no Protestant sect should have
arisen, taking them for their ground. Indeed, once
grant the propriety of the vow of virginity, and the

225

say, “from pressing celibacy, because of the weak- °
ness of the new converts; but if he had lived in our
times, when faith had been longer established, and
was become stronger, he would have felt no such
scruples; but would have encouraged it to the
utmost. He showed his wishes; he points out his
difficulty. We have not the same difficulty now.
Many voluntarily undertake it; and what evil arises ?
Is there any but what every good thing is attended
with? Are there some who do not keep their vow?
And so may not any vow be broken? Nay are there
not fewer who break the vow of celibacy, than there
are who break the vow of marriage? Are there
some who keep it hypocritically? But is not every
virtue liable to false pretenders? Are there some
who make virginity every thing? But is not that
an abuse to which every virtue is liable? People
naturally value themselves upon that in which they
excel others, until they have found out the evil of
spiritual pride.”

And supposing any one of us had lived then, with
our present notions, but without our experience,
what could we have said? Should we have said,
“ You put a mere corporeal abstinence, no where
commanded, in the place of real holiness?” “ Nay,”
they would have replied, “ we only regard it as a
means to an end. We do not deny that holiness
may be attained in matrimony; but we think it may
be more easily attained, or that a higher degree of
it may be attained in celibacy. You must allow that

227

have now, of experience, to show that our view of
Scripture, and our anticipations of the ultimate con-
sequences of thus exalting virginity, were right.
For instead of its being the fact that the worst
consequences of the vow were constantly appearing
in the early Church, there is no evidence that those
evils ever appeared till the Church of Carthage
became very corrupt, and the majority ready on the
first persecution to apostatize: nor is there any
sufficient evidence that they came forth subse-
quently, unless contemporaneously with general
corruption arising from other causes.

_ Similar remarks may apply to asceticism, whether
practised in a solitary life, or in societies. The
whole of the ascetic rule was built upon Scripture ;
wrongly applied, we say. But what was there to
show with convincing evidence to the solitary or the
monk, that he was wrong in selling all his goods to
give to the poor? or in keeping under his body and
bringing it into subjection in that particular point?
or in labouring with his hands the, thing which was
good, that he might have to give to him that
needeth, instead of working to support) a wife and
ehildren? or in spending all his leisure time in
reading the Scriptures or psalmody, or devout medi-
tation or prayer? Why was he to feel himself bound
to associate with his neighbours further than was for
their direct good, either temporal or spiritual? Why
might, he not retire from temptation, and content
himself with securing his own salvation, without

228

risking it altogether by remaining in the world?
And why might not those who were similarly
minded associate together for mutual encourage-
ment, and mutual profit, and especially to secure
that daily joint devotion which the Church at Jeru-
salem had in its best days, but which in the Church
at large was fast fadingaway? “How do we know,”
they might say, “ but these societies may be the means
of preserving that earnest piety which now appears
to be rapidly departing from the Church at large?”

We might have rejoined: “ This sounds very well,
but somehow or other your religion does not appear
to us Scriptural.” But they might have replied,
“ We do not know how this is: but can you show us
any set of persons who study the Scriptures more
than we do, or who bring forth better fruits of
piety ?” |

If we replied again: “ But you are too formal,
not sufficiently spiritual, building up a righteousness
of your own, without sufficient dependence on God ;”
they might still answer, “ Our aim in retiring from
the world has been to avoid temptations to pride,
and to cultivate a nearer and closer communion
with God.” But I have the less wish to dwell upon
this branch of the subject, because in referring to
the life of St. Antony in Mr. Newman’s “Church of
the Fathers,” I am sure I shall give a high treat to
every dispassionate person, to every one who wishes
to see what may be said on the opposite side of the
question to that which Mr. Taylor has taken; to.

229

every one who wishes to see the ancient Church
viewed in a spirit of love and sympathy for its good
points, instead of one of cavil and exaggeration of
all its bad and doubtful ones. That Mr. Newman is
impartial I do not pretend to say; because at his
time of life and with his decided principles, impar-
tiality is impossible ; but that he has chosen to look
the difficulties of Antony’s history in the face, and
give us the reflections of a sincere, and thoughtful,
and highly gifted mind upon them, is no light
matter,

But, although without experience, we might have
been unable to make any great impression upon the
advocates of asceticism, the experience of centuries
since that time, enables us to speak with much more
authority. The first evil which arose in the practice
of religious celibacy was the publicity of the profession
(although without any vow) coupled with the honour
unavoidably attached to it. This led persons to take
it up from a love of distinction, and from vain-glory ;
and these, of course, could not adhere to it. No
doubt in this state of things, many were supposed to
have taken up celibacy from religious motives, and
voluntarily, with whom it was scarcely a matter of
choice: and thus scandal would attach to the pro-
fession which did not properly belong to it. But
this alone did not continue to be the case: a vow
taken before the bishop, and a solemn consecration
by him, succeeded; and from that time the Church
virgins became a class, the individual members of

230

which were ascertainable, and capable of: wey
brought under Church censures for any impropriet
of conduct. Accordingly, it was made a fault,
punishable by penance, to associate familiarly with
persons of the other sex, or even to live in the same
forbidden; and thus they might, if they chose, es-
cape penance by marrying. But opinion rose on
the subject of the marriage of consecrated virgins.
It was considered that the vow was made to God
and the Church: marriage was a breach of the vow;
therefore marriage itself was spiritually an adultery,
and was to be punished. This caused the former
evils to increase, rather than diminish. Every shift
was tried to indulge passion, and yet to escape cen-
sure. For this state of things two remedies were
attempted; one, not to permit persons to dedicate
themselves till a somewhat mature age, the other, to
confine them in convents. The former, however,
does not seem to have prevailed at all extensively,
at least not in the west; but the latter was tried in
all the various degrees of rigour, of which the case
was capable, until the nuns were debarred from ever
leaving the walls of the convent, or ever speaking to
a person of the other sex, excepting their religious
adviser. Whether this was effectual or not, would
of course mrdepena upon the strictness or easiness of
overning person, and upon the general wish to
ecaaicie the vow. But experience has shown ‘that,
when either the superior was lax or unprincipled, ‘or

231

where any considerable number of the nuns became
tired of their vow, any breaches of it whatever were
possible ; and the most frightful profligacy might be
carried on, and the most awful crimes yagi
under the profession of superior sanctity.

In the Eastern Church the history of virgin celi-
bacy is not so clear: but the impossibility of enfore«
ing it seems at length to have led to the cessation of
all efforts for the purpose, or the profession itself fell
into desuetude: so that, if I mistake not, female
convents, or professed virgins, are in that portion of
the Church now unknown. They are now so far in
the same condition as ourselves; not exactly as the
primitive Church ; for in that virgins had a distinct
and useful function, viz, that of deaconesses, But as
that institution, from change of manners, is alto-
gether become obsolete, so all experience shows the
wisdom of leaving virginity to the voluntary choice
of individuals, bound by no vow, unshackled by any
profession; at liberty to marry whenever it may
appear desirable, but honoured in celibacy, if their
works show that they devote their state to God.

The history of the celibacy of men is somewhat
different. It does not appear to have taken any
definite shape in the time of Clement of Alexandria,
and Tertullian; nor were those who practised it
known by any definite tokens. Towards the time of
the council of Nice, however, they appear to have
adopted something like a regular habit, and to have.
united with celibacy religious retirement, discipline,

232

and voluntary poverty. To all this there could be
no objection, further than to the spirit of fanaticism,
or of Pharisaism mingled with it. But, as amongst
the ignorant and zealous, there will always be fanati-
cism, so it was better to have some outlet for it in
connexion with the Church, than to drive it to form
schisms. Not to say that the ascetic virtues were
always a lesson to the mass of the Church, to teach
them visibly that the world cam be forsaken, that
riches are not coveted by ail men, that there is some-
thing more exalted than a refined self-indulgence.

For many of the recluses were men of subsianits whi
had forsaken all literally for Christ’s sake. Many
of them were men of refined minds and polished
manners, who showed that these qualifications may
be united with poverty and solitude. At the time
of the council of Nice, things were in a state of
transition from the eremitical to the monastic state ;
and in the time of Basil, and under his patronage
and of the other great lights of the Church, monkery
was ripened into a perfect system; the direct vow was
added, and the breach of that vow was made penal.
Still there were many who merely professed a single
life with religious ends; and of this class were those
whom St. John Chrysostom so sarcastically describes
as busied in female toils, like the race of French
abbés before the revolution. This latter class has
never become totally extinct, though much dis-
couraged after the rise of the conventual system,
which was no doubt in some respects an improyve-

233

ment upon the eremitical and solitary, as it bound
men to a certain discipline: but it exists to this day
in the Kast. The conventual system has branched
out into various rules, according to the will of vari-
ous founders: but all experience has shown that no
rules, nothing in short but voluntary zeal and piety
can ever keep a body of men pure and useful; and
consequently that binding men to continue in a
body, the institutions and habits of which go to deny
them lawful indulgences, must lead and always will
lead to the vilest enormities in men of one character,
and to mere indolent uselessness in those of another.

The experience of ages then goes to confirm the
positions with which I set out; viz. that both in
men and in women celibacy should always be left
entirely voluntary; that those only should be en-
couraged to adopt it, who are disposed to devote
themselves to the service of God in some work of
piety ; that, in case of any person mistaking his voca-
tion, he should be allowed to retire without reproach
or remark, and endeavour to serve God in the lower,
but easier and safer path of wedlock: easier and
safer, I mean, as far as actual gross sin is concerned,
but, as a road to perfection, more arduous and more
difficult. |

Nor is the case altered in respect to the clergy.
In the history of the Nicene Chureh we find, co-
existent with clerical celibacy, rules against allowing
any females but near relations to live with a clergy-
man; and what does this show but that evil was at

235

is seen, yet, to those who have had an opportunity
of looking below the surface, there can be but little
doubt that the obligation to celibacy renders the
clergy unsafe to the morals of the female portion
of their congregations. The obligation is not one of
God’s appointment; it is never even hinted at in
Scripture: and the attempt to enforce it must always
produce great evils.

The utmost we can do is to take away discourage-
ments to it, to encourage those who are willing to
remain in that state, to point out the evils likely to
arise from clergymen of confined incomes entering
upon the married state, and the advantage to the
Church for peculiar purposes of having some of her
ministers bound by no worldly ties; to give the
honour which is rightfully due to those who choose,
for the sake of other men’s souls, or to avoid
worldliness of mind, to forego the comforts and
enjoyments of the married state. But beyond this
we cannot go. No slur ought to be cast upon those
who choose to marry prudently. No attempt ought
to be made to affix a distinction on the unmarried,
simply as such. No encouragement, but rather posi-
tive discouragement, should be given to vows of
celibacy. They are a snare upon the conscience,
and nothing more. Every sufficient end of them is
answered by a continued voluntary endeavour to
adhere to a well considered resolution; which we
are better able to keep, in such a case, without a
vow than with one.

237

and that is the insufficiency of their incomes,
especially in populous and increasing places, where
churches are rapidly raised without the possibility
of providing any adequate provision for the clergy-
man to whose pastoral care and teaching the people
are to be committed. Now societies of clergymen,
living in one common dwelling and eating at one
common table, appear best calculated to remedy this
deficiency. The very existence of boarding-houses
and club-houses, shows that the combination of
small incomes can produce comfort for all the in-
mates, which none of them could enjoy without such
combination.

There is another advantage attached to club-
houses which might be attached to societies of
clergymen, I mean that of libraries and the ordinary
vehicles of ephemeral information. A society can
provide for its united members a library far surpass-
ing what any of them could obtain separately.

And when such a society existed, I know not what
objection there could be to allowing any unattached
clergyman to join it. He would be kept in the
society which was most fit for him, out of the way
of the ordinary temptations which deteriorate the
characters of men without definite employment. A
facility of reference to books would foster or
engender a love of reading. He would be ready
to render occasional assistance to his brethren; and
he would be at hand to occupy any new station for
which a settled pastor had not been provided, or could

239

that in both cases it is in favour of moderate doc-
trines, and against exaggerated ones. The whole
ascetic system is professedly founded upon private
interpretation of Scripture. It was supposed that
the Church had grown to a power of doing
what the apostles would have enforced if they
could: and therefore the advocates of asceticism
are confessedly advocates of institutions increas-
ing in strictness with the increasing capabilities
of Christians. From the nature of things then
the Nicene doctrines and practices could not be
derived from tradition. They presupposed the im-
perfection of the Apostolical Church.

The only doctrine we can trace from age to age,
is that virginity is a voluntary thing, is a gift and
grace of God, is in some respects superior to mar-
riage, is to be honoured in those who maintain it
with the ordinary Christian graces and virtues, is
not to give occasion to pride or vain glory in those
who have it. That doctrine we can trace from age
to age in all the great writers of the Church, and
that doctrine is either that which I have derived
from Scripture, or in strict accordance with it.

There is one other lesson which I cannot refrain
from pressing, and that is the great value of primitive
unbroken tradition. On this particular point it is not
primitive tradition that is at variance with Scripture
and experience, for they are supported by it. It is
the supposed improyements of a later age. If my
inquiry had had no connection with the defence of the

240

early Church, I should have appealed to tradition at
once in support of my view of Scripture, and the
appeal would have been sustained. Tradition there-
fore has its value even in such a case as this. But
how much more value has it in cases in which there
can be no doubt of the meaning of its voice: where
from the beginning, and from age to age, it has been
one and uniform.

THE END.

GILBERT & RIVINGTON, Printers, St. John’s Square, London.

Internet Archive Audio

Featured

Top

Images

Featured

Top

Software

Featured

Top

Books

Featured

Top

Video

Featured

Top

Mobile Apps

Browser Extensions

Archive-It Subscription

Save Page Now

Full text of "The doctrine of Holy Scripture and of the Primitive Church, on the subject of religious celibacy : with a vindication of the early church from the mistakes of the author of "Ancient Christianity." : in three parts"

See other formats